Agenda item

5.1

The Policy Committee received no petitions from members of the public.

5.2

The Committee received two sets of questions from members of the public.

Question from: Friends of Graves Park

Regarding the Restoration of the next section of the Nurseries back to parkland:

1.      Will the Charity Subcommittee please acknowledge that the response to the Friends’ questions which we asked at the last Charity Subcommittee did not answer any of our questions?

2.      Will the Charity Subcommittee please acknowledge that the statement that “Elements of the Norton Nursery site have been used for the maintenance of Graves Park and other parks in the local area prior to the amalgamation of the nursery site into the 2009 Graves Park scheme” cannot be correct if SCC was claiming in 2008 that the site was “derelict and surplus to requirements” and that this response to our questions is misleading, particularly for anyone not fully familiar with the history of the site?

3.      Will the Charity Subcommittee please note that, as with the previous 2 restorations of parts of the site to parkland, the new restoration will be fenced off with supervised access to volunteers until the site is fully restored and safely opened to the public, so the response given to our questions which states, “We are aware of the excellent work the Friends of Graves Park have put into the Chantreyland Meadow and the Arboretum and are motivated to see further parts of the site restored to similar standards. However, we are currently not in a position to allow any volunteer groups access to the site to conduct work due to health and safety concerns. Due to moving vehicles, COSHH and PPE required it would not be safe for members of the public to have access to this site. Furthermore, there are a lot of vehicles, equipment and other expensive items that need to remain in a safe and locked area that is currently provided by the site.” Will the Charity Subcommittee acknowledge that this response is misleading, particularly for anyone not fully familiar with the site?

4.      Will the Charity Subcommittee please note that, in the above response from SCC to our questions, in the reference to the moving vehicles and expensive equipment, the Norton Nurseries site is not and never has been a depot, according to SCC, so it is not surprising that there are regular break-ins where fuel, vehicles and/or parts are stolen and that a proper secure depot would be a much better place to store council equipment that is not relevant to Graves Park?

5.      Will the Charity Sub-committee please, as a matter of urgency, agree to the land for the next section of Chantreyland Meadow and Arboretum (as identified in the questions of 22-1-24) being released to the Friends of Graves Park for restoration with immediate effect, so that it can be fenced off while it is restored back to parkland and then once restoration is complete, reopened to public use?

The Chair thanked the questioner for attending and advised that items to be discussed later in the agenda would be relevant to the questions posed. It was also noted that members intended to visit the Norton Nursery site and that a full written response would be provided once that visit had taken place.

Question from: Friends of Graves Park

Regarding the proposal to use the Glasshouses for Growing Food:

1.      While the Friends are broadly in favour of the glasshouses being used for food growing by members of the public, why was a formal consultation not conducted regarding this issue?

2.      Is the use of the greenhouses in this way really in the best interests of the Graves Park Charity? Is this getting best value for the charity? Has SCC checked that it is allowed to lease the greenhouses in this way and that they do not have to put it out to tender?

3.      Are the members of the Charity Subcommittee aware that the glasshouses have not been maintained and that therefore the estimate of £10,000 to restore the glasshouses is a woeful underestimate? Has a proper survey of the glasshouses been done and have the results been shared with the Charity Subcommittee?

4.      Can the Charity Subcommittee guarantee that any plans to bring the greenhouses back into use will not adversely affect the Friends of Graves Park’s long-standing request to restore the next section of the Norton Nurseries site back to parkland?

5.      Further to the above, does the proposed use of the greenhouses mean that the site will no longer be used as a general parks and open spaces depot and dumping ground?

6.      Does this also mean that the objections of SCC to the restoration of the next section of the Nurseries back to parkland by FOGP, at their own expense, because it would entail access by members of the public, will now be removed, as the above use of the greenhouses by members of the public is being approved?

The Chair referred again to the planned visit to the site by members of the committee, explained that some of the answers to these questions would be present in the officer’s report at item 10 and concluded that a full written response would be provided.