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
-
"Comms" is, I assume, the Communications Team.
I've also seen it called MarComms. Which mystified me. But apparently this is simply a helpful translation for Haringey's large Obfuscandian community.
-
Permalink Reply by 14t5gyrl1i705 on
-
im pretty sure i can get 500 people at least who are opposed to this idea to sign a petition. do you think the council will even care? they seem to have made thier mind up already
-
Permalink Reply by Omotn on
-
Petitions are a much more potent force (apparently) than they used to be. The council has a petitions policy which specifically requires petitions to be on paper. http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/council/meetings/making_your_voice...
I would love to see the petitions policy in action. I'd sign it, even though I responded (repeatedly) to the online survey saying what a good idea 5aside would be.
There's probably no need to panic too much - the next step is to seek a private partner. Would you go into business with Haringey. The saem situation applies at Hornsey Town Hall. Planning permisssion has been granted, but would a builder ever undertake some madcap Haringey scheme?
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Alan Stanton's a councillor, Joe. If he's suggesting it, it's probably not too late.
-
Permalink Reply by Gordon Jackson on
-
Speaking to the council folk at the consultation, I asked who had initially raised the idea of a 5s facility, "was it PowerLeague or Goals or one of those businesses"?
The lady said (I paraphrase from memory) that the council already had a partnership with PowerLeague from their other facilities in the borough, and that, coupled with other consultations on how to improve health and fitness in Harringay, had prompted them to look at Finsbury Park schemes.
Seems almost disingenous to pretend that the Council would "advertise to seek a suitable partner" when they're already in bed with Powerleague. She was very very careful to be impartial which was good, and that no decisions had been made.
I said to her that the idea a business could come along and say to the council "hey - you've got a park, we've got the business and we know you guys already, you've got some unhealthy folk - let's make lots of money" can trump the majority of residents/tax payers who on the day of the consultation were saying "this is a bad idea" was pretty depressing.
-
Permalink Reply by matt on
-
Well, Hugh put up the minutes from the last Friends of Parks meeting with the council which clearly showed the council is looking for revenue, particularly because of cutbacks to funding. A current example is Priory Park; council is 'looking for' a company to take over running the cafe and the tennis courts (which 'need investment', such as new tarmac).
Yes there is a Powerleague venue in Tottenham. Powerleague may well have done their own figures for assessing demand for the Finsbury Park site proposal and this may well be used by the council as part of their 'consultation' assessment and decision making process. 'Demand' for this venue could be in the 100s if not over a 1000 (more than objections). That is, don't be at all surprised if this scheme goes ahead.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
If as Gordon suggests, the council are justifying this to themselves and others on the grounds of improving health and fitness in Haringey then they are being dishonest. The targetted users of a paying facility to play five a side are unlikely to be the same as those with health and fitness problems in Haringey.
With regard to looking for partners to run existing facilities in parks such as cafes, there is precedent set for this (I believe the Markfield Park cafe is run this way) and, so long as no user is excluded from a facility, there is no reason why this may not be of benefit. The crucial difference here is the enclosure of a previously open and multi-purpose piece of land and the restriction of its use to those who can afford to pay. This should go against every principle that the elected council is built on - this can't be blamed on the cuts, the proposal was floated before Labour knew they had lost the election.
If the council really feels the need to put this 'land to use' although, in my opinion expressed elsewhere, it is already being put to the best use possible, then they must publicly acknowledge and consider the alternative proposals made by Transition FP and even the proposal by OAE to make it community growing land. To have a partner 'lined up' is anti-competitive and anti-community.
I would like to know what the councillor who began this thread and our other local elected representatives are saying about this proposal. Can i suggest we write to them and ask them to support the opposition to this scheme.
-
Permalink Reply by Phil M on
-
When I emailed Cllr Dogus on Monday to express my concerns, I copied in Cllrs Schmitz, Adamou and Alexander, as (a) they are councillors for my home ward and (b) the park falls within that ward.
Cllr Schmitz emailed me to tell me that he is on the planning committee, so it would be inappropriate for him to comment on this subject at the time being, but that he had read my comments. Which is fair enough.
I am still waiting to hear back from the other three...
-
-
And Cllr Alexander has just emailed me to tell me she "would not support the proposal in its current form" and that she is watching this discussion...
-
-
Thanks Phil, that's useful to know.
You may need to email Cllr Adamou separately. I was once told by an associate of hers that she tended to read the ones addressed directly to her (rather than the ones she is cc'd in) first.
-
-
Following Alan's suggestion at the end of August I emailed Dilek Dogus, cc John Morris, our local councillors, my neighbour Cllr Canver (Environment) & Dasos. I just need to hear from Ms Dogus and/or Mr Morris - cc to others was for info only. Sorry, it's a bit longwinded!:
'Dear Councillor Dogus,
As I believe you may have some benign influence on the protection of our Borough Parks for unrestricted use by all of us, please use your influence to oppose this private commercial project.
While I understand that some restrictions are necessary in maintaining Finsbury Park's integrity, I think it is clear that hard surfacing and enclosure of large sections of our Park have gone much too far already. Yes, some sports and pastimes (bowling green, tennis courts, athletics track) need to be railed/fenced off and require a certain minimum of pavilion and office space. In recent years, however, we have seen a growing 'land grab' and 'americanisation' of whole swathes of the Park, without any consultation.
We are fortunate to have Finsbury Park here on the edges of Haringey (and Harringay), Islington and Hackney. As you know, the original acreage for enclosure and protection against the late Victorian building boom was intended to be twice as large. Haringey in particular, with some assistance from Islington and Hackney, should be especially careful to maintain that protection of what should be the People's Park, maintained for the people and (as far as possible) paid for by the people. Commercially motivated, profit making private companies should have no part in it. I haven't noticed chunks of Hyde Park, St James's or Green Park being recently flogged off or leased out indefinitely. We lost 110 acres back in the 19th century; it would be ironic to lose more acres to the money men through our own stupidity in the 21st.
Of course, football and similar sports should be made available for our Haringey & Harringay youth - male and female. But that is not what this commercial project is about. Despite some weasel words and half promises about our young people having access to and use of the proposed "facility" outside of peak commercial hours, we know that is not going to happen. Commercial concerns will always be too jealous for the security of their assets and investment to share the facility in any sort of meaningful way for more casual day-to-day use by our young people. Besides it would not be very practical - and once it's built and laid out neither we the residents nor LBH (Community Services-Parks, Neighbourhoods or any other department) will be in the driving seat.
Councillor, we know that upkeep, maintenance and appropriate development of Finsbury Park could knock us back up to (?) £1million a year. Rather than inviting a private company to make that million a year and pay LBH peanuts, why not get together with John Morris and Nilgun Canver to persuade Claire Kober and Joe Goldberg to forget all this lark of freezing Council Tax (after all, it isn't election year till 2014/15!) and, with local Lib Dem backing, add 1%-2% ringfenced for Parks and Haringey Greening? An extra couple of million a year would do it. Yes we Can.
Finally, if LBH must go cutting off chunks of our Green Heritage, let it be for a nice stretch of Community-use Allotments - not necessarily in the tarmacked Basketball Area now under discussion; rather, in the potentially more fertile acres east/south-east of the New River. Community Allotments (of which the Borough is in extremely short supply) would provide interest and exercise for groups and families of all ages and abilities; offer a wide educational experience; supply some real organic produce to groups who would appreciate it; contribute more usefully to the community and environment than baseball/softball or even cricket ever did; result in a fairly minimal carbon footprint in stark contrast to a commercial soccer project with its 83 (83!) car-parking spaces; and perhaps even revive something of the 'Dig for Haringey' Blitz spirit. Community Allotments in Finsbury Park would have more to do with a Big Society than Tory toerags ever dreamt of.
As for the proposed noxious weed of commercialism: please be a really Green Gardener and nip it in the bud.
Yours, etc. . . . .'
-
-
Below is a copy of an email I sent at 1pm. to Mr Mun Thong Phung, Director of Adult, Culture & Community Services. (Copying John Morris, Assistant Director and Dilek Dogus, the "cabinet" councillor.)
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Dear Mr Phung,
Can I please ask you to look at this posting from Mr Gordon Jackson on Harringay Online website. It's part of a discussion thread on the proposal for a commercial lease for a 5-a-side centre on part of Finsbury Park.
Mr Jackson wrote that he had an informal conversation with a member of Haringey staff during the public consultation event. From this he has the impression that Haringey may have already been in negotiations with Powerleague Ltd about the 5-a-side proposal. Although Mr Jackson is also careful to stress that he is paraphrasing from memory and that the staff member “ . . . was very very careful to be impartial which was good, and that no decisions had been made.”
Before any rumours spread, can I please ask that we set the record straight and shed light on this. Can I and other councillors have clear information on any contacts/conversations/negotiations etc which may have taken place with Powerleague or any other 5-a-side company. And can a public statement be made as well.
I appreciate that the word “partnership” has become much abused. But I was under the impression that Powerleague’s activity in Haringey was limited to its lease with Community Action Sport (CAS) of part of the Frederick Knight Sports Ground in Willoughby Lane N17. According to the CAS annual accounts for 2008-9, it appears that Powerleague paid CAS a rent of £64,578. Is this around the level of annual rent which Haringey would anticipate from a commercial “partner” in Finsbury Park?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
