Is Sheffield Council about to sell off bits of Graves Park YET AGAIN?

[vincentb 10]

Well in that case you clearly haven't read the charitable deeds that govern Graves Park and the condition of the gifting on the land to "The People of Sheffield".

 

I haven't either. Unfortunately they don't seem to be easily available - not on the website of the Friends of Graves Park, for example, nor on the council's website. I would love to have a read of them myself if somebody could make them available somehow.

[remyrobson 10]

What will happen to the money raised from the sale of the cottage?

 

We are legally bound to invest the money in improvements to the park. We expect to receive around £80,000 from the sale and the list of improvements includes play facilities, the animal farm, footpaths and improved sports facilities. Whilst clearly not all of these can be funded from the sale, the best options will be considered and investment of the receipt is guaranteed.

[Eric Arthur 10]

What will happen to the money raised from the sale of the cottage?

 

We are legally bound to invest the money in improvements to the park. We expect to receive around £80,000 from the sale and the list of improvements includes play facilities, the animal farm, footpaths and improved sports facilities. Whilst clearly not all of these can be funded from the sale, the best options will be considered and investment of the receipt is guaranteed.

 

But is that in addition to current spending, or will future park spending be adjusted down by £150k so that the Council have £150k to spend on other things?

[remyrobson 10]

The trust (not the council) will have it in addition to current spending. The buyer of the property is also paying their legal fees so every penny goes back into the park.

[Daven 10]

The trust (not the council) will have it in addition to current spending. The buyer of the property is also paying their legal fees so every penny goes back into the park.

 

Albeit a rapidly shrinking park.

This is a slippery slope.

What part of the park will be sold off next ?

[Eric Arthur 10]

The trust (not the council) will have it in addition to current spending. The buyer of the property is also paying their legal fees so every penny goes back into the park.

 

Does that mean that current council spending in the park has been guaranteed? I can't understand what incentive there is for the Council to go through all this aggravation and legal work if they just meekly hand over the money.

[999tigger 10]

 

---------- Post added 27-01-2016 at 09:28 ----------

 

[/color]

 

Well in that case you clearly haven't read the charitable deeds that govern Graves Park and the condition of the gifting on the land to "The People of Sheffield".

 

Errr thats why I was asking. In any event just because property is given on certain conditions in 1926 doesnt mean they have to bind the charity in future.

 

Its often a case that a charity runs out of money or things change. The important thing is then to comply with using what property they have to meet its charitable objectives.

 

Having looked at the friends site then they make no reference to having to buy replacement land. Care to link us up?

 

---------- Post added 27-01-2016 at 13:04 ----------

 

Does that mean that current council spending in the park has been guaranteed? I can't understand what incentive there is for the Council to go through all this aggravation and legal work if they just meekly hand over the money.

 

You need to look at the accounts. Its a bit difficult to see how the Trustees cna be truly independent as there appears to be a conflict of interest between the activities of the trustees and the Council.

 

As mentioned previously in the thread it appears the park runs at a loss, which is then covered by the Council. As you point out the proceeds from the sale could mean that for a period of time the park runs at a smaller loss and in turn the Council have to probide a smaller amount to balance the books.

 

It doesnt mean they will do that and it should ve ebident as to how they spend the money from looking at the accounts.

[1978 14]

Albeit a rapidly shrinking park.

This is a slippery slope.

What part of the park will be sold off next ?

 

A small part has been sold off. To say rapidly shrinking suggests a large part has gone, and imply more big chunks are imminently to go. It's fair to be wary, but nothing in the council's action suggests this is likely now or in the near future.

 

Funding is an increasing problem. There's a need to think outside the traditional boxes. Alderman Graves would have done, and that's how the park was bought and donated.

 

Last year there was a story that the National Trust might take a hand in managing Sheffield's parks. http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/national-trust-could-run-sheffield-parks-1-7171400 I gather the Star's story was premature and over optimistic, and there were no detailed proposals then, or likely to emerge any time soon, if ever.

 

However, if different approaches are to be considered the thought of an immediate blanket of protest may well deter potential providers of help from becoming involved.

[Robin-H 11]

A small part has been sold off. To say rapidly shrinking suggests a large part has gone, and imply more big chunks are imminently to go. It's fair to be wary, but nothing in the council's action suggests this is likely now or in the near future.

 

Funding is an increasing problem. There's a need to think outside the traditional boxes. Alderman Graves would have done, and that's how the park was bought and donated.

 

Last year there was a story that the National Trust might take a hand in managing Sheffield's parks. http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/national-trust-could-run-sheffield-parks-1-7171400 I gather the Star's story was premature and over optimistic, and there were no detailed proposals then, or likely to emerge any time soon, if ever.

 

However, if different approaches are to be considered the thought of an immediate blanket of protest may well deter potential providers of help from becoming involved.

 

You may be right that there is no threat to the future of the park, but I don't think it is entirely accurate to say that nothing in the council's action suggests that is likely.

 

The council have tried to sell off large parts of Grave's Park for housing developments a number of times, so I don't think it is too much of a stretch to understand why people are worried about this possibility happening again in the future.

[vincentb 10]

You may be right that there is no threat to the future of the park, but I don't think it is entirely accurate to say that nothing in the council's action suggests that is likely.

 

The council have tried to sell off large parts of Grave's Park for housing developments a number of times, so I don't think it is too much of a stretch to understand why people are worried about this possibility happening again in the future.

 

As I understand it, the areas of land proposed for sale have never been parkland as such: two cottages and a plant nursery.

[foxy lady 10]

As I understand it, the areas of land proposed for sale have never been parkland as such: two cottages and a plant nursery.

 

I'm not sure that's correct. Parkland belonging to the charity was put to other uses. That use came to an end. That doesn't give the council the right to sell the land.

 

I note that in the 1960s a house was built on parkland near the tennis courts. This was used for a while by a park keeper. Does that now give the council the right to build an access road to that house and sell it as a private residence?

[vincentb 10]

As I understand it, the areas of land proposed for sale have never been parkland as such: two cottages and a plant nursery.

 

I'm not sure that's correct. Parkland belonging to the charity was put to other uses. That use came to an end. That doesn't give the council the right to sell the land.

As I understand it, the nursery and both cottages both predate the creation of the park i.e. there never was any open parkland or woods on those plots: they've always been developed plots?

 

I note that in the 1960s a house was built on parkland near the tennis courts. This was used for a while by a park keeper. Does that now give the council the right to build an access road to that house and sell it as a private residence?

 

That's a hypothetical about a different thing; I'm asking about concrete facts: whether the plots which the council have in the past proposed for sale have actually ever been open recreational parkland or not.