There's just not enough cash to save Castle Park (From Warrington Guardian)

There's just not enough cash to save Castle Park

I AM writing in response to criticism and comments made at the public meetings regarding the proposed plan to site the Rock surgery in a small area of Castle Park. I hope I can ease some worries and answer some of the queries raised.

Some of the people who attended the meetings suggested that they would rather see the house either demolished or boarded up if the surrounding parkland could be preserved.

Firstly, I believe that there would be unbridled opposition to such a solution and secondly this would not take into account the fact that the parkland alone costs around £100,000 per annum to keep in its present state.

To return the park to its former glory would cost almost £1m.

Where is this funding to be found?

Another comment made was that the Charity Commissioners would oppose these plans. The commissioners are now coming around to realise that properties such as Castle Park need to have an end use and that the use needs to be relevant in the world of 2004 rather than 1934. Similarly, at a recent meeting with the Heritage Lottery Fund team they suggested that there would be more likelihood of a grant if the park could be seen to be providing a community use and not being preserved in perpetuity as it stands.

I accept that the house and gardens have been left to deteriorate due to mismanagement by the borough council over a number of years. However this is the first time that I have been in a position where I can actually influence what is happening at Vale Royal and unfortunately the present administration has to pick up the pieces left by 12 years of neglect by the previous Labour-controlled council. There are no monies available to fund the repairs which are urgently needed to the house but the house is an asset which, if managed properly in the future, could bring revenue into the Castle Park Trust.

I firmly believe that any concerns regarding traffic noise to neighbours, access and the style of the proposal can be overcome in the planning process. Sympathetic planting schemes, alterations to the A56 entrance and acoustic fencing can all be used.

There are also the other benefits that further use of the park will bring such as security, the removal of the skateboard ramp to a more suitable setting and the end of cars parking in the park in the early hours with blaring music and noisy youths.

CLR NIGEL GRIFFITHS

Frodsham Town Council