Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Finsbury Park 5 a side football consultation
I have been down to Finsbury Park to have a look at the the plans and talk to some of the Haringey Council staff about the possible plans for a 5 a side football scheme. Its just initial consultation to gauge public feeling in the area - worth going down for look and a chat.
Tags for Forum Posts: finsbury park, finsbury park 5 a side, parks
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Here's the reply I got today from Ms Erica Owusu-Boateng "Sports Hub Officer" in Recreation Services. (Normally I don't name other than senior council officers, but in this case Ms Owusu-Boateng has posted on HoL)
I've not had a reply from Mr Mun Thong Phung, Director; nor from Mr John Morris, Assistant Director; nor Cllr Dilek Dogus, Cabinet Member.
Apart from comments on Harringay Online I have yet to hear officially about the outcome of this consultation. (However, I was briefly in hospital and haven't yet started attending meetings again. So maybe I missed this.)
----- Original Message -----
Sent : Friday, October 08, 2010 2:37 PM
Dear Cllr Stanton,
Thank you for your email regarding the proposed development of a Football Centre at Finsbury Park, and the communication between Power League and other 5-a-side companies.
In response to your queries;
Initial contact was made with Goals and Power League as part of the consultation for the ‘Football Development Plan’, adopted by Cabinet in September 2009, to explore options for facility provision.
Please follow link http://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.asp?CId=118&... to view relevant documents.
From this initial contact, it was clear that both companies were interested in Finsbury Park as a potential location for a new 5-a-side facility.
Subsequently, as part of the consultation process for testing the acceptability of the proposal we have requested information such as images, answers to frequently asked question, and details of previous builds for use during the public consultation.
No reference or comparison has been made to the Frederick Knight Sports Ground in Willoughby N17, as the Finsbury Park is completely different.
However should the Council decide, in the future, to secure this type of development, it would be on the basis of receiving an annual revenue payment.
Regards,
Erica Owusu-Boateng
Sports Hub Officer
Recreation Services
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Why are the plans dated 2006 then?
-
-
Dunno, John.
As you're the one who carefully perused these plans, could I please suggest you email Cllr Dogus, Mr Phung and Mr Morris; referring to my post above and the apparent discrepancy. I'm sure they'll happily let the sunshine flood in.
And of, course, please post your email and the replie(s) on HoL
-
-
Cllr Dogus was happy to come on HoL after the election to scold us for not voting Labour. He can come on here now and deny that the plans were drawn up in 2006 as part of the regeneration of the park.
-
-
My mistake. I just can't face another round of emails that are never answered and was looking for excuses, and thinking of Cllr Diakkades.
Apologies to Cllr Dogus, who is apparently not a member of HoL. -
-
-
John McMullan and I exchanged emails about this apparent discrepancy. I wrote to Mr Mun Thong Phung the Director of Adult, Culture & Community Services. Mr Phung replied today (12 October) confirming as below:
____________________________________________
1. "The Council, via the Assistant Director of Recreation Services, was initially approached in February 2009 by the Goals company. 2. The Council was provided with drawings on two occasions. The first was in March 2009 following a meeting between officers from Recreation Services and Goals. This drawing was submitted at officers request in order to seek to demonstrate how the five a side facility could be developed within the Park. This provided the basis for the reference to a potential facility in Finsbury Park in the Cabinet report of September 2009. The second occasion was in November 2009. Again this drawing was provided by Goals and was requested by officers to enable the subsequent public consultation to be undertaken on the proposal to locate a facility in Finsbury Park. This was to enable the public to have an indication of what a facility would consist of in design terms.
____________________________________________
Both drawings contain numbering for reference purposes under the headings ‘computer file’ and ‘project number’. Officers’ assumption is that this is for document management purposes by the company supplying the drawings. The Council does not know, and has not asked, how this reference system worked.
Following adoption of the Cabinet report in September 2009, officers contacted Power League, the other major commercial 5 a side operator, to ascertain if they would be interested in developing and operating a facility from Finsbury Park. They responded that they would be interested.
No payment was made to Goals or any company or organisation acting on behalf of Goals for these drawings. The drawings were provided by Goals on an ‘at risk’ basis.
If, following the public consultation, the Council had decided to proceed with this proposal, an open tendering process would have been required in order to secure best value for the Council.
The headline results from the consultation indicated that 140 respondents were against the proposal and 100 in favour. Following consultation with the Lead Member, it has been decided not to pursue this proposal further at this time. The results and outcome of the consultation are available to view on the Council’s website."
It seems to me that this helpful and detailed information clarifies the position. As I had previously been assured, the Council was entirely genuine about the openness of the consultation on this proposal.
However, I too was puzzled by the questions John raised about the drawings. So I'm pleased Mr Phung has now explained exactly what took place.
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Just to say that I have not yet had a response to my email to Cllr Dogus, in which I asked what would happen next and when. I'll post it here as soon as I get it ...
I wrote:
I am writing to enquire when the decision will be announced about the proposals for a 5 a side football enterprise in Finsbury Park.
Personally I am very opposed to this development, both because of the traffic implications that stem from 80 additional car parking spaces in the park, and also because of the transformation of an area that has to date been democratically used by many different users, free of charge.
I note that many similar objections were raised at the public consulation event held in the partk itself, where the negative comments outweighed the positive ones quite considerably. Similar themes have emerged on the local website Harringayonline. I hope that the public sentiment around this isue will be taken into account when the Council makes its decision.
Yours etc
-
-
Alison, Here's a copy of my email today to Cllr Dilek Dogus and my Labour councillor colleagues.
═══════════════════════════
Hi Dilek, I've been watching the video on the Council's website with excerpts from the consultation day. Very helpful.
Can I please ask that this issue is brought both to the "cabinet" and to Labour Group for discussion. With a full officers' report available in advance and - as far as possible given commercial issues - made public. (Including posted on Haringey's website.)
I appreciate that officers - and perhaps you too? - have genuine reasons for thinking this is a good deal for Finsbury Park users and for the Council. That it would bring in a large capital investment and mean this particular area of the park is better used. It could also generate income to invest elsewhere in the park.
I also accept that our parks benefit from having a diverse range of activities and "magnets" which draw different people at different times; and help to make a park lively, safe, well-used and well-loved.
However, I wonder if this particular deal might be even more favourable to a commercial company? Having a site near a major railway/bus station would be very attractive. Not to mention that the proposal involves creating new carparking spaces. I'm sure many companies would love to acquire what are literally 'green field' sites. Compared to the expense of buying land in the same areas, a lease could be an excellent bargain. How long a lease is proposed, by the way?
Many of the responses to the consultation seem to be about which sports are given space and support. And whether - in effect - reserving this part of the park for 5-a-side is the right approach. (I'm told that 5-a-side football is currently enjoying a mini-boom nationally. That may not be the case in 5 years or even sooner.)
But most important, I believe we need some public debate about a fundamental principle - whether it's right to grant a long lease of part of a public park to a commercial company. As you know there's been increasing national discussion about the privatisation of public space. (Including the important work of Anna Minton.)
Plainly there are treasured parks which have - for historical or other reasons - a range of attractions and even commercial businesses. (I'm thinking, for instance of London Zoo and Regents Park Open Air Theatre; and the various cafés and other concessions operating in Alexandra Palace Park.)
But this proposal seems different in kind. Partly it's because the companies in this field are primarily commercial promoters. Though the consultation documents describe them as our "partners"; this is misleading. They are accountable not to the public, but to their owners / shareholders. Their central concern would not be the public good but the size of their profits and getting a lease long enough to make their capital investment attractive financially.
I'm concerned too about the possible precedent this could set for our established parks. I would not want to see it become the thin end of a very fat wedge. We've read about possible Government plans to sell-off nature reserves.
Best wishes, Alan
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Here's my response from Comms just now:
"The results of the consultation should have been published sooner, and we expect them to be on the website tomorrow."
Looks like we've reminded the, perhaps?
(Well done for giving us a nudge, Joe)
-
-
I haven't found it on the website today (18 September). Though there's a "comment wall file which I hadn't spotted before.
The news I had yesterday was that the 5-a-side proposal is still "currently under consideration" by Cllr Dilek Dogus and Cllr Claire Kober "who have yet to take a view on this".
-
Permalink Reply by 14t5gyrl1i705 on
-
I am starting a petition tomorrow. I was on finsbury park basketbal courts from 2-3 pm and 6-8pm today and i must of counted at least 400 people using the concrete area for different uses. if anyone wants to sign it let me know
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
