Bramcote Unity Park Project – Proposal for Land Adjacent to Bramcote Ridge

Click on this file to see The Master Plan

Click on this link to see a short video with details of the project. This link will expire at the end of the weekend. After then see https://youtu.be/SBU4gMS2StY

See also www.bramcoteunitypark.co.uk

26 Comments

  1. We do not need this wild space with its mature trees sanitised into a park. It takes hundreds of years to grow a tree – vital to the sinking of the pollution around here, not to mention the new 5G mast which will add more !
    Young saplings will not do the job and more paths means losing more trees. Intelligent people now know the importance of wild places where nature and bees can thrive. There are wild bees in the sandstone paths, they cannot live under tarmac tracks.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Dear Elizabeth,
      We have already replied to your comment via email and you will now be furnished with the knowledge that the presumption of the trees that are being added are not just young saplings, but indigenous species removed from where the development will take place at the former golf course. As I have offered, we have the ecologists’ reports which state that the wildlife in the area is severely lacking for many reasons. All this information will be available on the website, but we will only be adding to that by introducing wetland ponds, apiaries (bee-hives), bat boxes, bird boxes, habitats for smaller insects amongst others.
      As locals, we only want to improve what’s there but there is an awful lot of expenditure that goes with that, which is why we have tried to make the best plan for everybody. We have been inundated with emails of support since Friday and we hope that once peoples’ concerns have been answered, the entire community will be behind this proposal. It’s not every day that land is gifted to the community where once is has been fenced off.
      Should you wish to discuss this further, please reply to the email.
      Many thanks

      Like

  2. Maybe this is just the thin edge of the wedge to drive more private development into open space. I suppose the organisation behind the public unity park is the actual developer planning to ‘encourage’ local authorities to release more development land. After all they are about to establish the principle with this scheme and will anticipate that we will roll over and then them.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Have you been to the Library today, Dave? One thing in our favour is the Japanese Knot weed which will cost many thousands to successfully eradicate before the two luxury houses planned for Broxtowe side are given permission.
      Plans go in at the end of September, so there is one week for objections to be lodged. They haven’t done their homework properly on the land and did not know about the plan for a new phone mast – already passed – that will be three times the height of the exisiting one. For 5G.

      Like

      1. Thanks, that’s interesting to know. A naive question from someone who went briefly to the ‘presentation’ at the library: have the developers been granted planning permission for the 11 “dwellings”?

        Like

      2. Hello,
        We are trying to reply to as many queries/misconceptions as possible that appear on Bramcote Today’s website.
        It doesn’t just cost thousands to eradicate the Japanese Knotweed and variegated angel weed, but hundreds of thousands! The plans have already been submitted, not in September as you state. We are aware of the plans for the mast and hope that Wollaton & Bramcote enjoy the 5G connections.
        If you have any further queries, please contact us directly via the website, http://www.bramcoteunitypark.co.uk

        Like

  3. Colin – no; the planning application has been submitted to both Nottingham City and Broxtowe and should go live today or over the next couple of days. There will be a consultation period for members of the public to express their views on the application.

    Hope that helps,

    Paul

    Like

    1. Thanks, that is helpful and encouraging. I feared that the development would be a done deal already. I’m not optimistic about either council turning the application down as £1m is a tasty ‘incentive’ in these austere days, but if we don’t live in hope we might as well jump off a cliff.

      Like

  4. Spent an hour today in the library asking questions and listening to a very hard sell. But in principal a concept that is certainly worthy of much consideration.

    However a cynic might say ‘it sounds too good to be true and an elaborate scheme to ensure the development of 11 very expensive houses on precious green space for the benefit of the Developer’

    The sustainability of a volunteer Charity to manage the project is certainly possible but needs residents/Groups to step forward to take on this large task now and in the future. To set up it will surely need expert in put and maybe management at tax payer cost from both the City and Borough Environment Departments to ensure future continuity.?

    The old Golf Club proposed open space being incorporated into the scheme again seems an excellent solution going forward. However the land is currently up for sale and surely therefore its gift to the Charity would need to be negotiated with any new owner/s.

    An exciting project upon which I remain open minded and await our Council Representatives and in particular that of their Planners views and recommendations before offering a final personal opinion.

    I learnt today that the Japanese knotweed was NOT as I requested it should be included in the deed of sale by the previous owners. The cost of its expert removal would I suggest be six figures.

    Like

    1. Dear Martin,
      Thank you for taking the time to properly study the proposals put forward for the Bramcote Unity Park. A few points which might be useful:
      – This land was purchased and will be donated into a Charitably Incorporated Organisation, to which we have invited (and received!) many offers of participation to the Board of Directors. We will be looking for specific qualities within applicants to ensure a high quality with a varied skill base. This CIO will be in receipt of the ongoing maintenance funding for the project at the outset. Although the detailed plans are set out, we hope that the Board of Directors will still be able to guide the fine detail of the initial capital expenditure in the creation of the park.
      – With regards to expertise, we have over the last year taken the advice of many consultants from expert ecologists, arboriculturalists, and even employed the services of the Head of Parks and Open Spaces for Westminster Council to advise us on the creation of this park. The old golf course proposed open space is indeed as you say, up for sale and the incoming purchasers are a commercially minded operation who have made it clear that they will not have any interest in the running of a public park, which is why the parkland will be included within our CIO and our board of directors will therefore have the requisite influence over its creation. There is more sensitive information I can gladly give to you in person should you be interested.
      – In relation to your last point on the Giant Japanese Knotweed, the private individuals that have purchased the large section of land separating Alexandrina & Sandy Lane LNR were not made aware of this prior to purchase. However expert advice has been sought on its removal, in addition to the variegated angel weed, and the best quote obtained from 3 contractors was £398,000.00. They also confirmed the knotweed would breach the boundaries of the Sandy Lane LNR and private dwelling houses in under 24 months.
      – We intend to plant 1072 indigenous trees, many of which are going to be taken from the area of development that will be taking place for the care properties and imported across the Bramcote Unity Park in order that we know they are the correct species and are semi-matures, not simply saplings.
      I hope this helps, thank you for your interest and we would be delighted to help further if you’d like to get in touch via the Bramcote Unity Park website.

      Like

      1. Regardless of the greenwash and marketing spin, the clear reality is that a large part of the Ridge, which has been a public space used by locals for decades, will be taken from public use by the developments. Public utility will become private assets, and the land will be irrevocably destroyed. There’s no sugar-coating that reality.

        Like

      2. Colin,
        The reality is that the land is private and always has been. As part of the covenant when purchasing the land, it should be fenced off. We would rather gift this land, increasing the public space by 21% putting it into local ownership so that no more land can be built on, than fence all 11.5 acres off, leaving the public with a lot less. We want to improve what is there, keeping it as nature intended (not just adding saplings as many assume) but making it accessible for all. The Japanese Knotweed is going to cost a small fortune to remove safely, amongst many other costs which the general public will not see any of.
        It is a shame when good intentions are met with scepticism and we are just thrilled that the very vast majority of attendees of Friday’s event are behind this because they understand it. It isn’t a marketing spin, it’s people wanting to make a difference to the future generation’s green space which will vastly decrease due to housing demand, which we would then make impossible on this wonderful green corridor.
        Thank you for taking the time to make your comments.

        Like

      3. “The reality is that the land is private and always has been.”

        That’s a legal matter, but in practice, as I know for a lived fact, the Ridge has been open to all for at least the 15 years I’ve been in the area, and I’m told this goes back longer.

        “As part of the covenant when purchasing the land, it should be fenced off. We would rather gift this land, increasing the public space by 21% putting it into local ownership so that no more land can be built on, than fence all 11.5 acres off, leaving the public with a lot less.”

        Good spinning and revisionism. You’re earning your corn. However, developers are commercial entities in business to make a profit. They are not charities. They do not “gift” anything. Ever. Your spin is that, by buying the land, you could have fenced it all off, and thus we should be grateful that you’ve left a fraction of it publicly available as a “gift”. How about, you don’t build anything on the land at all? No profit to be made from that, though.

        “it’s people wanting to make a difference to the future generation’s green space which will vastly decrease due to housing demand,”

        Translation: “people” = ‘developers’. “Vastly decrease” = ‘some other developer’s going to build on the Ridge anyway, so put up with our offer or else’. As for “housing demand”, there’s an awful lot of space around this area to satisfy this “demand” – the houses going up on Field Farm, for starters. You’re wanting to build on the Ridge because you’ve got the land on a cheapo, and it’ll be a very attractive place for the well-heeled house buyers.

        Fact: if this goes ahead, the area available to the public will be significantly reduced, for the private profit of the developers. A public good will become a private asset.

        Supposition: there’ll be further building beyond the “11 dwellings”, which will further reduce public access.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I am pleased some folks can see the truth behind the marketing spin. The developers are not local as we were told. They are based in Halifax. What will they care of the unique ridge. I was assured no badgers but I have seen them
        myself. There are no guarantees to locals once the councils agree to sell up. We all need to object before it is too late. Yes, it is all about profit when you really look at the scheme.

        Like

  5. Martin makes some great points.
    My understanding was that the old golf course open space was going to be gifted to this project.
    The Japanese knotweed issue is a big problem. As a resident of Sandy Lane I have seen over the past 3 years how it has tripled in size and the previous owners did nothing about it. There seems to be a clear plan for this, and without it the whole area could be swamped by knotweed within the next 10 years. This could be the best/only way that anyone would pay the £350k+ to remove it from this site and leave this green area free from knotweed for future generations.

    Like

    1. The owner of the land would be required to treat the knotweed eventually to prevent it spreading to neighbouring properties.

      Like

  6. If this truly is a charitable organization. Will the profits made from the sale of the eleven houses, be set in trust for the upkeep of the new park?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’d say that the whole scheme is a way of obtaining building land at a low price. This ancient woodland is a wonderful natural habitat for flora and fauna, including a host of protected badger setts.

      Like

  7. What a wonderful Idea, I hope these guys succeed with this project. Private land being gifted to the public.

    Like

    1. Precisely the opposite. Land that’s been practically public for decades is being expropriated by developers for ever. I don’t know about the legal status of the Ridge, and indeed I’d not considered it until this project came out of the blue, but it’s been publicly accessible in all the time I’ve been in the area. I’ve used it countless times and, to my shame, rather took it for granted. As the the Joni Mitchell song goes, you don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone 😦

      Like

      1. There are two areas of public land, Alexandra Plantation and Sandy Lane Ridge, but the land between the two is privately owned. We refused planning permission for the houses that are currently there but were overturned on appeal by the Secretary of State. The areas where they are proposing to build are all in private ownership. It is the private land that has Japanese knotweed on it.

        Like

  8. A few simple questions from a concerned naturalist who has seen this kind of corporate activity ruin many perfectly fine green spaces.
    1. Who conducted your ecological survey? (can I see it)?
    2. Can you identify exactly which two trees you are felling (most likely very old oaks)
    3.Exactly what means do you intend to deal with Japanese knotweed (chemicals are not very nature friendly)
    4. Variegated Yellow Archangel is no more of a problem than dandelions. and bees love it. Why remove it?
    5. In your corporate video, under the heading creating new habitat for birds and bats you show a RED-BELLIED WOODPECKER, this is a native of North America and is never seen in Britain. Will you be introducing non natives as well as domesticated honey bees?

    I look forward to your response.

    Like

    1. Well done, Nick for challenging this proposal. It looks very impressive but, like you, there are many unanswered questions, not least the one about who has done the ‘expert’ surveying and is the report open to us? Who manages it once it has been made into parkland? Maintanence costs, accountability etc. At least Broxtowe Council and the CC are accountable to us the public who elect them, not so private developers. We don’t need more luxury housing just for greed and profit.

      Like

      1. Actually we do need more housing, Boris tells us so. As have numerous ministers before him. As have the borough council which has been required to allocate more and more land for new housing, even our greenbelt, heaven forbid.
        It’s profit (greed, if you like) that drives developers to build homes: without it they wouldn’t build anything. Building ‘luxury houses’ often releases other more affordable homes lower down the chain (those that aren’t used up by in-migrating population) and increasing the supply of homes might help keep prices down so that our kids and grandkids might be able to afford a reasonable home in the locality.
        The challenge is to get a reasonable balance, and when planning consents are given a developer should be compelled by law (not the council) to build it out otherwise the developer holds all the cards and doesn’t have to spend anything despite potentially blighting a locality due to just holding onto the site.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s