I agree about limited information re these two weekends in august when part of our park will be walled off so a private company can make money and local park users and residents will get a blasting which they have not agreed to. It is not clear which weekend has the extra days as you say. The use of the park for events in the summer months was not part of the events agreement made years ago in a previous Labour administration. We already have the prospect of 3-day Wireless with 45,000 people in July plus another 2/3 day festival a week later. So when do the residents and local people, many of whom who don’t have gardens, have the chance to enjoy the park in the summer months without having to listen to music they may not like but which is unavoidable?
And the amount of money made by Haringey Council is a pittance - £5.12p per person for every £70 ticket for Wireless (stats from HC). Given the huge arena Live Nation gets for this festival plus being next to one of the best connected tube and rail stations in London, this amount is absurd. Interesting that Crystal Palace would not have them back again this year after last year’s outing for Wireless which caused a huge backlash from the local community. The volume of music coming from these festivals stretches as far as Stamford Hill and Queens Wood in Highgate but there is no independent monitoring of the sound. As both HC and festival organisers have an interest in turning up the volume, this is exactly what happens.
The damage to the park is well known. After the last two wet weekends of Krankbrother festival there were at least 8 acres of compacted mud after 6,000 danced on the grass and a large area of grass had to be raked over with new topsoil and reseeded. It is still recovering. Previous festivals have had the same result. This park was provided for local people 150 years ago. It is not an area for the Council to make money out of at the cost to local people who want it as a park - it is not presently in safe custody. There is money in the budget to provide a park in this area without losing it for the two best months of the year.
I think local people should stand up to those who want to wall off our park for key summer months. It has really shown how important this park is during lockdown with thousands of people using it to chill out, play games and lie in the sun. This is a very densely populated part of London and the park is needed for people to enjoy nature, have peace and play in the fresh air. Not to make millions - and I mean millions - for speculators supposedly for young people. If they want to have 45,000 at a festival hold it outside London. If they can get to Glastonbury, they can get to Hertfordshire or Essex,
another issue of concern, particularly as the plan is to increase the number of attendees for this event from 6000 to 8000 a day, is the potential long-term damage to the majestic plain trees that line the carriageway up to Manor House. The Woodland Trust states “Tree roots and soils can be readily damaged by compaction especially by large numbers of pedestrians in a concentrated area, car parking and construction traffic. Unexpected turns of events or weather conditions may lead to emergencies such as overflow parking or access being managed by people without the background to be aware of potential damage. As damage leads to tree decline a spiral of tree surgery and further irretrievable decline can be triggered. As trees may take several years to decline the impact of events may not be immediately perceived but overtime it can lead to a great loss of trees and the beauty they provide and no amount of new planting can replace.” https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/media/1814/ancient-trees-and-event...
As a local resident, I find this festival and the accompanying helicopters/social elements annoying, but I refuse to be a NIMBY. However the extreme +ve economic value of urban parks must not be underestimated and thus all your points (and more) are valid.
I would suggest understanding the economic basis behind the council's pricing decision (for example, maybe they have priced the tree issues Carrie outlines), and if it is too low, offer an increase. Is there info on this? Or was this a decision made via envelope and pen?
Unfortunately, councils are in a financial pickle and I imagine must take every opportunity they can to make/take some money. Parks depts in particular I imagine come some way down the food chain, and must scrimp and save. A public sector approach to business though doesn't often end well...
difficult to put a price on 150 year old trees .....
but not impossible. Start with priceless