Elvaston castle Sell off

[veritas]

http://www.friendsofelvaston.co.uk/wise.htm

Not spamming, just trying to raise awareness of this site just up the road from me. The council are so determined to sell it to a private company they must have already had more than a few 'incentives'

 

[Nemesis]

But - what viable alternative solution have the Friends of Elvaston come up with for the house? No-one will give any public grant aid without a viable business plan for the future. Grant aid would not in any case be available for all the repair costs.

Agreed that years of neglect by the council have meant the building and surroundings are in a shabby state - on At Risk Registers etc... but grant aid is in short supply, with the Lottery Funds dwindling and English Heritage grant aid cut hugely.

The National Trust will not be able to take it on as there is no funding for repair and future maintenance, so solutions are really few. Private investment would at least enable the Castle to be repaired and retained, even if that is a commercial venture. I gather the repair costs are now huge.

The architect concerned is a well-known conservation architect, and Dr Spilsbury is hardly a Nasty Developer who will ruin the building.

Any Lottery funding given for restoration of grounds and gardens would ensure public access, if that was removed the funds would have to be paid back.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmodpm/47/47we36.htm

 

[Nimrod]

As I understand it, various suggestions put forward by the Friends of Elvaston have been rejected out of hand by Derbyshire County Council. For all the public money that the Council has spent on disposing of the Park, very little seems to have actually happened, other than the fact that it has been further neglected.

It isn’t true that grant aid would not be available for the Castle, it is a public asset. Public funding is not available to benefit private profit making enterprises. Heritage Lottery Grants could be made available if the Park stayed in the public domain, which is, in the views of the majority of the community, where it belongs.

Public investment would at least enable the Castle to be repaired and retained – what has happened to Council taxpayer’s contributions already? The House has a grade 2* listing and the Garden grade1, the Council has obligations which it does not appear to be fulfilling.

Finally, Is it true that Dr Spilsbury has no experience whatsoever in the restoration of country estates? In any case, it will not need a ‘nasty developer’ (as Nemesis terms it) to ruin the building, if the County Council doesn’t do something about the matter soon!

 

[Nemesis]

The grant situation is not so simple as that believe me, there are no large pots of money readily available to simply be handed out for repair, and I have delved a little further into the situation. Not many easy answers, as with so many buildings at risk.

It seems that many of the ideas would possibly not bring in a funding stream sufficient to satisfy the providers of grant aid, and of course match funding would have to be sought.

Meanwhile, the building will deteriorate further. The park is a separate issue. It is not being disposed of as far as I can see.

Dr Spilsbury - I doubt that ruination is on the agenda, and the architect is a very good and well known conservation architect. As a II* Listed building English Heritage will have input into any plans too.

I find a great deal of the vilification on that website distasteful actually.

 

[Nimrod]

If Nemesis cannot see that the Park is being disposed of then he or she appears either disingenuous or not perhaps as informed as he or she would like others to believe. The Council has advertised its intention to dispose of the House and 150 acres of Parkland to a real estate developer.

The House will at least double in size, with new build extending into the Courtyard and the Paddock, with new materials and construction methods being employed.

The Friends of Elvaston’s Forward Plan contains many sound ideas for saving Elvaston Castle which I am sure that they will elaborate on at an opportune time. The Plan involves the whole community in the conservation of the Estate, including the training of some of today’s disenfranchised youth, particularly in methods of conservation and preservation. What finer training ground could there be? As for finance, it costs £100,000 a year to keep just one of these youngsters in an institution.

I’m sure that Period Property UK would agree that when dealing with somewhere like Elvaston Castle it is better to have the support of the community rather than its total opposition. If the Friends and the community believed that Dr Spilsbury’s plan was the best way forward, then I am sure that they would give it their full support instead of wholeheartedly opposing it.

Finally, most fundamentally of all, the community does not want Elvaston privatised – it is as simple as that. Might I also suggest that those who don’t like vilification should not belong to the Flat Earth Society.

 

[Nemesis]

I am not naive - I am very informed about the situation.

I have no desire to add further to what I have already said. I am however concerned that much on the Friends website is not as informed as it could be.

I gather you are a Friend of Elvaston. You post speaks volumes.

Vilification of those who command respect in conservation circles however is not a sound move. If Dr Spilsbury (a RICS surveyor whose PhD is in the rescue and re-use of historic buildings) has put together a rescue package and the local authority has accepted this, then it is up to the local community to protest to the local authority. A local referendum for example could be called to vote on the issue.

And as for ideas about training disenfranchised youth - it's never as simple as that. The cost of keeping someone in an 'institution' isn't going to be re-allocated to spend on Elvaston, for example.

Community support - it's often there in theory, but it so frequently evaporates when it comes to the crunch of putting in the hours over many years.

Many ideas are fine in theory but funding packages are not always available for them. The local authority has a duty to ensure that any proposal for the building is sound and viable into the future.

As for disposal - is it not the case that public access to the park will be maintained?

All plans will have to be passed by English Heritage. If EH feels them to be unsuitable than they are at liberty to block them. Other conservation groups too will be able to comment.

I have read the Friends of Elvaston site carefully and sought further information. There are a number of claims on the site which I feel show a certain level of misunderstanding.

I appreciate that in an ideal world local people would prefer the house to be repaired and run by a community trust, but this may not be possible with regard to getting grant aid, and in the meanwhile the local authority has the liability of the house deteriorating further.

 

[Nimrod]

If you are as informed about the situation as you claim to be then you must be aware that public access to the Park will be severely curtailed under the disposal plan. No member of the public will be allowed anywhere near the House/hotel, the present building will at least double in size, the Caravan Club and the riding facilities may disappear, the Local Nature Reserve will be ruined, Church visitors may be inconvenienced, people will have to duck and dive from golf balls whilst using the footpaths and bridleways, the planned access roads will be very dangerous, the whole character of the Park will be irreversibly altered.

If either the Friends or anyone else for that matter is unclear about what the County Council’s intentions are with regard to Elvaston Castle it is as a direct result of the fact that the public has never been properly informed about the exact nature or scale of what is planned. Indeed, the plans seem to alter one way or another each time they resurface!

Conservation skills used for the benefit of the community, indeed the nation, and properly carried out, are something which is to be admired. However, to use the word conservation in the context of destroying that which actually needs conserving, and using the common and usually very limited commercial options, ie., hotel, pub, restaurant, etc., especially at a time when these institutions are also being regularly boarded up, is as boring and unimaginative as it is hackneyed.

Whilst Dr Spilsbury’s PHD may be in the rescue and re-use of historic buildings, it is my understanding that she has absolutely no practical experience whatsoever in having carried out such a rescue. That the local authority has accepted this means that it is completely ignoring the enormous community protest against the plan. Following the County Council’s Final Public Consultation last January, out of 611 public responses, only 13 were in favour. Either this says nothing for Dr Spilsbury’s plan, or it is directed against the authority’s commitment to the disposal, which, to say it is unpopular, would be extremely understated.

I will reiterate – If, as Nemesis claims, he or she is aux fait with the plans and feels that the Friends of Elvaston website shows a certain level of misunderstanding, then perhaps Nemesis would care to enlighten us all. I, for one, would be fascinated to learn from his or her apparent superior knowledge of the subject.

I gather that you are somehow involved in the plans. Your post speaks volumes.

 

[Nemesis]

No. I'm not at all involved.

I do however have a fair bit of knowledge regarding the rescue of historic buildings, and the grant aid situation.

I'm not totally convinced that the Friends of Elvaston are aware of all the difficulties. As it seems the plans are not yet set in stone (or indeed have been put before any planning committee) then it's difficult to know how accurate the perceived problems may be.

 

[Nimrod]

It is interesting to note that your criticisms are all aimed at the ideas and comments of the Friends of Elvaston with regard to the County Council’s lamentable plans for Elvaston Castle.

As someone who is informed about conservation matters one might have expected some of the benefit of your knowledge to have been pointed in the direction of Derbyshire County Council.

In the last eight years the authority has marketed the Park, both freehold and leasehold, and has continued to rigorously pursue the course of disposing of the Park despite enormous public opposition. There are 17 listed buildings on the Estate and yet very little, if anything, seems to have been done to protect or preserve them in all that time.

The Friends of Elvaston, having lobbied the Local Planning Authority regarding the damage to listed buildings, managed to get the hole in the roof of the Working Farm Museum repaired, prolific ivy growth which was lifting the roof tiles on part of the Stable Block removed, and the cause of the roof leak which had been damaging the ceiling and walls of Lady Harrington’s Bedroom for years, sorted out, all of which was reported in the local paper.

The water ingress which had been damaging the Bedroom for years turned out to have been caused by a guttering which was blocked with debris. So, for the sake of unblocking a guttering, damage has been unnecessarily caused to a grade 2* listed building due to the inefficiency of those charged with its care. Those in charge of a listed building have a statutory duty to keep it wind and weatherproof. Perhaps the timely intervention of a conservation architect might have made a difference?

I am informed that the when the Friends initially made an official complaint about the problems to English Heritage they were directed by EH to the Local Planning Authority (South Derbyshire District Council), which claimed to have no knowledge of any problems with listed buildings which were requiring drastic action at Elvaston Castle. It was only after photographs of the damage were sent that the Authority reacted straight away to have the matters rectified.

Finally, the Friends requested that the County Council take up its offer of a survey of the House by a member of the Royal Institute of British Architects, which was offered free of charge. This was turned down by the County Council.

 

[Nemesis]

Actually, I think you will find that a statutory duty to keep a listed building wind and weatherproof is a very grey area!

I am also unsure what use a survey of the building by a RIBA architect would be.

However - the situation is not simple, no easy answers I'm afraid. The local authority hasn't available the vast amounts of cash to repair, grant aid isn't really going to be forthcoming in major amounts, so it seems that unless someone is able and willing to take on the place and put up the hard cash the future of the building isn't too rosy.

 

[Moo]

The local authority hasn't available the vast amounts of cash to repair, grant aid isn't really going to be forthcoming in major amounts, so it seems that unless someone is able and willing to take on the place and put up the hard cash the future of the building isn't too rosy.

But, surely, that applies to almost all the buildings at risk, or in danger of falling into that category?
Hard cash is so often in the hands of hard people, who have little or no respect or feeling for the niceties of caring for a piece of history.

I'm willing to bet that the local council in question comes down very hard indeed on individual home-owners regarding the fine detail of work that will be paid for out of taxed income. And, come to think of it, happy to slap on a warning notice when it's not the council that will be paying for the repairs.

I appreciate that money's in short supply, and that upping local taxes isn't a vote-winner, but somewhere in this case there do seem to be some double-standards lurking in the shadows.


However, it's comforting to learn that there are groups around who care so passionately about their local treasures.

 

[Nemesis]

It seems to me that the council carried out repairs, and the building is now watertight. And I think you will find that action by local authorities is very infrequent in reality.

The problem is here that lovely though it is that people care, that has to be tempered with the reality of public funding. It is not available in huge quantities, it is tied up in all manner of red tape, if it all goes belly up it has to be paid back. It also requires match funding.

I also wonder how legal it would be to levy a specific local tax to repair the house and the estate? The sums run into many millions I think.

If the local authority has no plans for the house then of course it could be ordered to dispose of it to the highest bidder anyhow by the Secretary of State. It seems to me to have plans, for the house and the park, in order to give both a future. As I think the plans have not as yet been put forward for planning approval it is difficult to say if they are or are not appropriate in the circumstances.

This is a vastly complex case, but it seems to me that that the Friends are not being totally realistic in any plans for taking over the hall and park.

As a Grade II* listed building, any enabling development will have to be passed by English Heritage.

It's a very good building, but given how many buildings there are at risk of an even higher grade and how little public funding is available to repair then I'm afraid pragmatism is probably going to have to prevail.

Of the seventeen listed structures on the estate, how many are deemed at risk?

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/ConBar.4573

http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/search/details.aspx?pid=1&id=83000


I believe Derek Latham is the architect involved:

http://www.lathamarchitects.co.uk/derek.html

http://www.lathamarchitects.co.uk/book.html

This may make interesting reading too:

http://www.lanarca.co.uk/portfolio8.htm

 

[Nimrod]

Nemesis accuses the Friends of Elvaston of being ‘unrealistic’ in wishing to see Elvaston Castle remain in public ownership, for the benefit of the almost three quarters of a million visitors a year.

It seems somewhat odd that a person who claims to know such a lot about the matter should continue to endorse with such apparent enthusiasm a disposal in which he or she also states;

‘As I think the plans have not as yet been put forward for planning approval it is difficult to say if they are or are not ‘appropriate in the circumstances.’

On the subject of the architect, yes, unless the situation has changed, Derek Latham is the architect involved. I remember attending a packed public meeting over Elvaston Castle in a local pub a couple of years or so ago, where Mr Latham addressed the audience. In answering two of the points which people had raised, he voiced the matter in terms of ‘winners and losers’.

“If you win, you will continue to be able to walk around the Castle and have access as you do at present. If we win, you won’t be able to go up to the Castle itself, and dogs will have to be kept on leads”.

I remember the consternation of several of the people with whom I was standing at the back of the room, at these comments. The attendance that night underlined the strength of public feeling against the proposals.

On the matter of the County Council carrying out repairs, it only carried out the repairs over which the Friends of Elvaston had made an official complaint to English Heritage. Similar complaints over other outstanding matters of conservation, such as damage to listed walled areas of the Gardens, have not been addressed by the County Council.

A survey by a RIBA architect would verify whether the figure of £4 million for restoration is indeed an accurate one. I believe that it is the developer that has provided this figure. At a full Council meeting of Wednesday, November 3, 2004, in response to a question from an Alvaston resident, “Why have the County Council allowed Elvaston Castle to get into such disrepair”, Councillor Bob Janes answered;

“The Council has for many years continued to maintain the Castle, it is a listed building, and as such the owner is obligated to keep the structure in a sound watertight condition. In the 1970s’ extensive dry rot work was undertaken, and currently security and building maintenance expenditure in the order of £150K per annum is being expended. The Castle is not being allowed to fall into disrepair”.

I am reliably informed that following the judicial review brought by the Friends of Elvaston at the end of 2005 the £3 million figure for restoration was increased to £4 million by the County Council. Is, as the County Council states, £4 million of restoration work required? Or is it the case, as the County Council also states, that the Castle is not being allowed to fall into disrepair?

Nemesis links to sites which reinforce the County Council’s disposal plans, such as the one to Lanarca, which carried out what some have described as ‘a supermarket survey’, regarding the Garden restoration plans which the County Council commissioned as part of its bid for £10 million of Heritage Lottery funding. This alone cost £25,000 of taxpayer’s money, with little to show for it. The survey was both inaccurate and misleading in many ways, and, to many people that I have spoken to, ‘a waste of public money!’ Have another look for yourselves at Lanarca’s survey (follow the link from Nemesis). Bear in mind whilst you read it that the survey was supposedly to inform a restoration plan to William Barron’s original design. Judge for yourselves if this is the case.

On the Lanarca site it also states that the County Council has; ‘identified a significant sum of matched funding’, if the HLF money is not forthcoming. If that is the case, isn’t it about time that this funding was used to carry out necessary works on the Castle now?

Nemesis appears to support the development, even though he or she has admitted the difficulty of deciding whether or not the plans are ‘appropriate in the circumstances’.

It is a worn out concept to attempt to mislead the public into accepting a commercial plan or idea which will exclude them, or is not in their best interests, based on a Domesday scenario. Obviously, those who use such tactics are not entitled to any ‘professional respect’.

 

[Nemesis]

Well, all I'm interested in is the long term future of the building. It may be that a commercial future secures that. Rescue of historic buildings is never an easy thing to achieve. I don't care who rescues it as long as it rescued, and doesn't deteriorate further. Houses standing unused tend not to improve with time.

I'm not actually endorsing anything - I have an open mind, although the further I delve the more disquiet I feel about aspects of the Friends' site. There seem to be no concrete plans which could be put forward to the AHF and major funders, and some of the funding streams identified I suspect may not be viable when examined more closely.

If indeed the Friends took on the castle and received public funding via the HLF and it did indeed prove unviable, than that cash would have to be paid back. It happened with Endsleigh House, and sadly the Trustees were forced also to disperse of the important contents in order to raise cash. Therefore the house would have to be sold to pay back the cash.

I rather thought that the match funding was for the Heritage Lottery bid - for the park - not a stand alone sum instead of Heritage Lottery cash.

I can't see actually what is wrong with keeping dogs on leads where members of the public are, and as for winners and losers... well, it does seem to have become a very adversarial situation. But I think you will find that the main players in this proposed scheme have been and are what can only be described as friends of the conservation movement, and as such have and do command respect in the wider world than the local pub.

If the Friends 'won' and plans for the hall included conferences and weddings, (although the lack of residential facilities does limit the scope of both) then I think some privacy would still be required around the building, without loose dogs and owners appearing at any and all odd hours.

The HLF I gather has paid for conservation plans etc - part of the requirement for a bid for the funding for the park. Another Country Park (with a hotel) which bears some resemblance to Elvaston is Hardwick in Durham, where HL funding is aiding its restoration also.

I thiink four million could be quite a conservative estimate for repair, conservation, and decoration, quite honestly. It depends what that sum covers. These things don't come cheaply, and was the building not in use at one time as a school? Institutional use rarely deals kindly with buildings. Council cash throughout the land has been in short supply for many years - all manner of services have been cut, and councils have been 'rate capped' etc who overspent. Rises in council taxes are not a simple matter.

If local people don't like the plans of course they are free to vote out councillors at election time.

And as for any requirement to keep a listed building in a sound watertight condition - despite attempts to make that mandatory the government has so far not passed any such law. It is a grey area. It was raised at last year's Commons Select Committee on heritage and again it was stated that no such duty would be enshrined in law. Given how many listed buildings are in a shocking state throughout the land it possibly isn't realsitic to think any government would pass such a law as then it may be asked why funding doesn't follow.

Certainly any owner of a building in a state of dreadful disrepair can have action taken against them, but it rarely happens.

However, I doubt that continuing this discussion here will add anything to the outcome, and I put links to other sites in case others wished to view matters further. They can make up their own minds, carry out theor own research if they are interested.

When any finalised plans eventually surface for planning permission, then all will be able to comment, or indeed object if they wish.

PS. How many people have visited Elvaston Castle in the past year - the building as opposed to the Country Park? The two seem to being combined when as far as I can see they are separate items really. Has the house ever been open as a visitor attraction?

 

[Nimrod]

Nemesis does not appear to put forward any possible alternative solutions for Elvaston Castle him/her self, whilst continuously wielding criticisms of the Friends of Elvaston and the Forward Plan of the organization. The air of superiority displayed by Nemesis in some statements proves a lack of open-mindedness in the affair;

“But I think you will find that the main players in this proposed scheme have been and are what can only be described as friends of the conservation movement, and as such have and do command respect in the wider world than the local pub”.

The inference here is obviously intended to portray that the thoughts and opinions of those not of the ‘conservation movement’ as being nothing more than bar-room expertise. The reason that the meeting had been called in a local pub was because it was the only venue available in the area with room to accommodate the large number of members of the public who turned up to register their feelings in the matter, having been treated as though they didn’t exist by Derbyshire County Council.

Let me reiterate that the ‘main players’ in this debacle are the general public to whom the Elvaston Estate belongs, and who are incensed by the fact that their wishes on the future of the Estate are being trampled on by a local authority which has deliberately taken a decision which actually endangers the future conservation of Elvaston Castle Country Park, not protects it.

English Heritage now recognizes that golf courses can damage the historic settings that many have been placed in. There is a lot of history worth protecting in the Parkland at Elvaston, which will be in danger of destruction should golf courses be built there.

Nemesis asks how many people have visited the House, rather than the Park, in the last year? This shows the divisiveness which seems to influence most of the comments made on much of the issue by Nemesis. The answer is perhaps to go and look for yourself. New Year’s day saw vehicles constantly queueing to enter the main Fox Covert car park, which was full, with the community taking full advantage of their Country Park. When, prior to last season, the Council ran tours of parts of the House itself, they were very popular, often being fully booked.

If the disposal goes ahead, here is what will be lost to the community, in effect, making the use of the term ‘conservation’ redundant. The House, the jewel in the crown. Massive extensions with new materials and construction methods will ruin all scale and balance anyway. The Courtyard area. The Local Nature Reserve. The Nature Conservation Area. The RIGS site on the Oak Flat. Lost and as yet unchartered areas of William Barron’s drainage scheme. Clover Close fields. The magnificent South Drive and Bedford Drive (both to roads). Archaeology from pre-history onwards. The sanctity which the Estate provides.

Nemesis mentions that elections offer people a chance to change plans that they don’t agree with. Whilst that statement might be debatable in this country today I will say this in support of Derbyshire County Council. Whilst a great many people from the City of Derby use the Park, the City Council doesn’t contribute a single penny to it. This cannot be right with the future of the Estate in jeopardy especially as it was reported that Central Government recently gave £2.1 million to Derby City Council to improve public open spaces in Derby. Central Government recognizes the importance of recreation and open space to the health and well being of the nation. It is a great shame that both Derbyshire County Council and Derby City Council, are seemingly oblivious to it.

 

[Nemesis]

I think really this is boring everyone including me actually.

Possibly demolition is the answer. I'll suggest that to English Heritage. As they will have the final say on the house then it may be the solution.

I would love though to see these dreadful plans for the house which are apparently now in the public domain and available for comment? Possibly you can point me in the direction of where they are in the public domain.

And explain where you think the public cash could come from to make this into the Elysian Fields, because those of us who live in the real world would love to know where these crocks of gold are hiding. That way, we could rescue so much.

A small word of advice - don't p*** off those who may have originally been willing to help in whatever small way they could. Making the general into the personal is never a good idea.

 

[Nimrod]

Nemesis’s boredom threshold is rather low. If a few short paragraphs of open discussion which he or she entered into with such apparent professional zeal and expertise have proven to be too much, how would they fare in the real world?

Sarcasm and bad language will hardly help you get your point across Nemesis. I really don’t think that any advice that you can offer me would be helpful under such circumstances.

If you are sincere in your claims and really had some notion of helping in the situation then disagreeing with one person’s point of view should not dissuade you from taking that course of action as easily as it appears to have done.

A small word of advice from me – leaving the sanctimony of your ivory tower will not do you any harm!

 

[Nemesis]

I'm bored because frankly this is pointless. I have better things to do with my time. This isn't discussion and you simply avoid answering hard questions like - where are these plans which you say are so awful?

I can see why, if you are typical of the Friends, no-one with the power to change things is listening. I live in the real world, not in some ivory tower.

There are no pots of gold waiting to be handed out. None from English Heritage (grant aid is very limited and I doubt Elvaston is a high priority) none from the National Trust (mentioned on the Friends site) which is not a public grant aiding body and the HLF would require a rather more secure set of plans than the waffle I have heard so far. I gather you have never been involved with the HLF before this?

Being irate with people who gently draw your attention to the flaws in your plans seems to me not to be too sound a way to get them on board.

It seems that the local authority is progressing plans to rescue the building from dereliction. That can only be applauded - one less building at risk. Once the plans are published then they will be open for public comment, and comment from a number of conservation bodies. Let's see what they have to say.

 

[Pford75]

Having read the debate that has raged back and forth over the past two pages, I must confess that I find it very difficult to have a strong opinion either way.

I don't know the buildings in question - but then local people often miss the bigger national picture.

It seemed a very reasonable request to have a look at the plans (which are in the public domain?) only then can we begin to form an opinion on whether the proposed development is sympathetic or a disaster. If the friends are opposed to all private development, whatever it's nature...then this is not a period property debate...or one concerned with conserving architecture...it's one of political philosophy.

If the plans are not in the public domain, I politely suggest that we all keep our collective knickers on until we can debate facts rather than hearsay

 

[Nemesis]

Let's be clear - as far as I understand it the Country Park is NOT being removed from public access. Parts of the land may be but not the entire estate.

A listed building at risk belonging to the local authority (not the general public) and for which a new use is required in order to maintain and repair the building has got plans in development which will give it a future. It will take considerable amounts of cash to repair it and maintain it into the future. Some public access is proposed as part of these plans, and presumably any member of the public, for a cash sum, will be able to use the hotel, hold a wedding there, maybe visit for a drink and a meal. In return for securing repair and a future for a building of national significance some land around the building will have to go with it - in order to help gain an income (banks won't lend without sound business plans and upmarket hotels really won't want dogs running loose and anyone who fancies wandering around near the building) and guests will require some privacy too. There will have to be some enabling development, agreed with English Heritage (and there are national guidelines) in order that a secure income can be gained.

The local authority has been working for a number of years to secure Heritage Lottery funding for the park and gardens, from a pot of funding which can only be applied for for that purpose. The application was turned down initially, with a recommendation that the council looks for a partner in the private sector and comes back with a plan for the whole estate. The local authority has set aside a sum of money for the match funding required for this bid. If Lottery funding is given then public access has to be part of that deal - I thought plans were afoot to form a charitable trust to deal with this. As part of any lottery bid there are hoops which have to be gone through first and the HLF has stumped up cash already for some of these gyrations.

The developer chosen by the local authority for the house and her architect, are people who have a great deal of sympathy for historic buildings and their conservation - indeed the architect served on SPAB national committee for many years, and is highly regarded in his field.

Any plans for the house and the garden and the park will have to go out for consultation to the public, English Heritage, and many other statutory consultees and conservation groups. All are able to object to them on planning grounds. If the plans are passed and it seems that these go against national guidelines then a call-in can be requested and a Public Inquiry held.

However, that will not look at the question of the fact the local authority clearly feels that a private developer is more likely to deliver a long term future for the building than a local voluntary trust, especially given the sums of money which would be involved and the diminishing pots of public funding which could be accessed after many hoops have been gone through.

It's possibly far too major a gamble for a local authority to take if it all goes very wrong in the future. Let's hope any lease granted will have a fail safe mechanism whereby if it all goes pear shaped the hotel will revert to the local authority.