Concerts in the Park

JoeV · October 2013

I'm curious why people would support corporate, for profit, money-making events in a public space? It's one thing if the concerts were free but they aren't. I find it odd. If Tesco opened a pop-up shop in the park, celebrating every little helps, I think the pitchforks and torches would come out.

[Deleted User] · October 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Papa · October 2013

@Misscara I reckon about 40% of our local population might be mistaken for middle-aged northerners<br>

nick_m · October 2013

The main problem with the gigs is that it extends the park run course, making a PB next to impossible. They claim they compensate for the fences, but this is simply not true, my times dropped by 20-30 seconds. I would pay the 57p to keep a level playing field.

andy · October 2013

@nick_m - For me, FP is a really slow parkrun course anyway. I've done 2 or 3 minutes quicker at other venues that don't have any serious inclines.

[Deleted User] · October 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

ChangN4N6 · October 2013

The police are absolutely not interested in drug dealing or drug use, which is a dereliction of duty and helps other crime thrive. Even with a right wing major and govt, illegal drugs are everywhere and more than tolerated . And the effects, apart from rise in human misery and related crime, it is totally anti community.No one cares. It makes me sick to see a culture that encourages junkies (and not just from poor backgrounds). Chang

kreuzkav · October 2013

@ Graeme. I agree that it's good to have bands playing in the park and I love Finsbury Park being the centre of Britain musically for a weekend. But from what I saw and the reaction from lots of the locals the Stone Roses concert (not Inspiral Carpets, the lad rock Madchester scene wasn't really what rocked my boat) caused a lot of disruption to many people. More than a funfair does. To be honest I really don't care about how many concerts take place as I usually just walk through the park on the way to Green Lanes. Just think it's a balancing act.

NorthNineteen · October 2013

You do realise every single mainstream drugs (at least a dozen in all) are on a downward trend?

ChangN4N6 · October 2013

Not where I live, unfortunately. Chang

quince · October 2013

And not from my vantage point on the top deck of a bus, stuck in traffic between Manor House and FP,<span style="font-size: 10pt;"> as the Saturday gig was gearing up. Dealers spaced out at intervals along the back fence, plenty of business to go around, it appeared...</span>

vetski · October 2013

This up on HOL today: <a href="http://www.harringayonline.com/forum/topics/haringey-plans-to-treble-the-number-of-concerts-days-at-finsbury">http://www.harringayonline.com/forum/topics/haringey-plans-to-treble-the-number-of-concerts-days-at-finsbury</a>.

[Deleted User] · October 2013

The user and all related content has been deleted.

ADGS · October 2013

Graeme - if you want to include "<span style="font-family: 'lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif; line-height: 20.796875px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">the intangible value to local residents who </span><i style="font-family: 'lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif; line-height: 20.796875px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">do </i><span style="font-family: 'lucida grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', tahoma, sans-serif; line-height: 20.796875px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">want to attend events at the park", you also have to include the annoyance to the rest of us in the costs. And I doubt there's a band on Earth which more people would want to have causing mass disruption on their doorstep than would rather didn't, so that's never going to do the sums any favours. Although obviously counting the happy faces but not the sad faces would be entirely plausible if Haringey took a leaf out of Islington's book when it came to misleading use of consultation statistics.</span>

ChangN4N6 · October 2013

Yes. I hope the teams/hoards of cub reporters spitting round here will take a good luck at this. Chang

miss annie · October 2013

Here's the invitation to 'Have your say'. http://www.haringey.gov.uk/finsburyparkevents

DillysDad · October 2013

@Arkady, I do know Kevin, yes. Great guy.<br><br>The Friends of Finsbury Park point of view is that the council are using the park to make a clear profit.<br><br>The £130,000 is profit, they then kept (as far as I'm aware) the £10,000 deposit (or an amount of) for damages to the park.<br><br>Simon Farrow's (Haringey Events) annual income target is £165,000 per year, What they are now proposing is to make almost £400,000 per year out of the park just from large corporate gigs.<br><br>We (FoFP) were offered free tickets (by the promoter) for the Stone Roses gig, which we declined. Giving free tickets to the local community weakens our position when we need to hold the promoters and council to account.<br><br>My personal opinion is that the council put very little money into the park, there's no way on earth they should be boosting the accounts of other departments through the milking of our already underfunded park. Finsbury Park has already had it's resources sucked up by every other green space in the borough, it shouldn't be put under further strain.<br><br>It's also important to note how the MPS Haringey who received £30,000 from the promoters reported their crime figures from the Stone Roses gig. Admittedly, I found it a fairly peaceful event but am aware of a fair few assaults, lots of drug arrests, drunk and disorderly etc. When the police came to report their findings from the event, hardly any of this was mentioned. <br>

dion · October 2013

It would be good if they could spend the money raised from the Park, on facilities for the Park. For example, wouldn't some floodlights for the tennis courts be nice? Or redoing the cafe so it has a roof terrace? Employing another member of staff or two? Proper accountable ringfencing of the cash would definitely help their case. <div><br></div><div>I can't really see any point in agreeing to more concerts which, although may be fun, do stop us using the park and hassle up the transport, if the money only goes to some generic council coffer.</div>

miss annie · October 2013

@dion Friends of Finsbury Pk tweeted something interesting about the amount they can spend on the Park.

Mirandola · October 2013

Ringfencing is very very very risky.

NorthNineteen · October 2013

Councils do it all the time with money recieve especially s106 payments in relation to new development.<br>

FinsParkFriends · October 2013

Hello all, Apologies for being late to the party. As many of you know, the council are trying to bully through proposals that will see more than half of Finsbury Park closed off for up to 3 months from next year. Here is our official response Dear Friends, You may have heard about the Council's plans to increase the number of large scale events in Finsbury Park. We urge you to please complete the consultation (www.haringey.gov.uk/finsburyparkevents) before the deadline on 31 October. But please do read our position below before you do, as it contains important background information. To enable us to tackle issues like the proposed Events Policy, we need as many members as possible. We are therefore actively growing our membership and you will be hearing from us more often. Please do also follow us on Facebook (www.facebook.com/finsburyparkfriends) and Twitter (www.twitter.com/finsparkfriends) and tell your friends and fellow Park users! Our position on the proposed Events Policy: The Friends of Finsbury Park are deeply concerned about Haringey Council's consultation on the event policy and the plans to increase the number of large scale events in Finsbury Park. tbc

FinsParkFriends · October 2013

... What the council say: On holding events in Finsbury Park: “Less events, the result of competition from other venues, means we have less money to spend on maintaining and improving Finsbury Park and other parks in the borough” On the current Events Policy: “The council has for the last 11 years been managing events in Finsbury Park based on a series of recommendations agreed by Cabinet on 3 December 2002” On event organisers: “Allowing more large events of a longer duration will allow the council to offer bookings to more than one event organiser” On the income target for events: “This will help the council to meet the income target for 2014 of £165,000.” On reinvesting income into the park: “The current policy states that any additional income generated above the annual income target should be set aside for use in the Park. Due to the lack of bookings in recent years there has not been any additional income to reinvest in the Park.” “It is proposed that the use of additional income generated be used in other parks in the borough as well as Finsbury Park” On the proposed number of events: "We propose that the new policy increases the number of large events permissible from five to six; and increases the duration from one to two days (three days on some occasions). On event attendee numbers: “The existing policy limits the number of people attending large events to 40,000." ”Ongoing premises licences are held by two event organisers for Finsbury Park: one for an attendance level of 39,999 and the other for 49,999.” On park usage during event times: “It shows that the remaining part of Finsbury Park (not being used for the event) is larger than the whole of Clissold Park.” On a community festival: “It is proposed that a sum of £20,000 per annum would be set aside from the events income so that: annual community led festivals in the parks will continue to be supported" What we say: We believe in sustainable, varied and considerate use of the Park and that industrial-scale commercial concerts cause significant damage, disruption and distress to the park, its users and neighbours. We also believe that park revenue should come from facilities and services that are accessible and affordable for all. We don’t believe that Finsbury Park should have revenue targets as the main purpose of a public park is to provide recreational opportunities for the local community. And we don’t think that Finsbury Park should be touted around as a concert venue to subsidise other council spending or to support all Haringey’s other parks. The council never properly consulted on the current 2002 policy (which permits five large scale commercial events per year) so the basis of the current consultation is flawed. We do not believe that Finsbury Park should be an asset or venue to be touted around to various events organisers, who will use the park without the park users’ best interests at heart. The council has not consulted on the increased income target of £165,000 to be generated from events in Finsbury Park. We have concerns around whether this is a reasonable and sustainable target for our public space, particularly as none of this income goes back into the park - see point 5 – and given the state of the park following recent events. The council’s events policy only allows for additional income to be invested back into the park – that’s income over and above the council’s target. We believe that all income generated from the park should be reinvested into the park. The proposed policy worsens the situation further for Finsbury Park as it plans to share any additional income across all parks in the borough. Furthermore as the park, users and local residents - not to mention wildlife - will bear the brunt of these events it does not seem equitable that funds should be expended elsewhere. The existing policy allows for five 1-day large events. The new policy allows for six 3-day large events – taking the total permitted from 5 days to 18 days. Adding in set up and take down time of 1-2 weeks per event, that’s 6-12 weeks per year that park users cannot use more than half of the park.Furthermore, it is estimated that the 2-day Stone Roses concert generated revenues in excess of £6.5m for SJM Ltd, with the council receiving £130,000.Using the same calculations, two 2-day events could raise £260,000 for the council - well in excess of the £165k revenue target. And proving the need for six 3-day events excessive. Not only does this show that the council has already entered into an agreement which is in breach of its existing policy, it also shows that concerts will have to take up more room than they have previously to allow for the extra 10,000 attendees per concert. So even more of the park that users won’t have access to. The point that park users will still have an area the size of Clissold Park to use is invalid. Park users live, and have chosen to live, near Finsbury Park and our council taxes should allow us to benefit from this park – all year round. We don’t feel that it is possible to host a community festival on top of all the other proposed events. Even with perfect weather the park would not recover in time for the next event, rendering significant areas of the park as 'no-go' areas for much, if not, all of summer 2014 Further to the above, we know that the council has already received applications from SJM Ltd and Live Nation for three 2-day events between May and July 2014 with 50,000 attendees on each day. We therefore feel that this consultation is already destined to be found to approve the five day policy as well as the revenue target, rather than be a true consultation. We urge you to tell the council your views and please feel free to ask any further questions for clarification on any of the above.

FinsParkFriends · October 2013

It's also vital that people write to Haringeys licensing dept to block the proposal from Live Nation. Any objections need to be sent in writing before 21st November. We feel that by applying for this license, Live Nation are presuming it's a given that the councils proposal will go through. See the Finsparkfriends twitter account for more information or to sign up to our mailing list.

gardener-joe · October 2013

Why not challenge the consultation in court if you believe the original process is/was flawed. That will stop everything dead in its tracks, no?. Maybe somewhere out there is a pro-bono community-minded lawyer who'd spearhead this? Where are our councillors and MPs on all this I wonder? Anyhow, Friends of FPk, I wish you well in your campaign.

FinsParkFriends · November 2013

Good morning folks. We're coming up to the last week of the consultation. We urge everyone to fill out the councils online form. The only people that can stop the council profitting from the park and closing half if it for up to 3 months are you. The consultation ends on the 10th November. We also urge you all to oppose the licence application for Live Nation, in writing. You can send the council an important message. The park is not for pimping!!!

Sutent · November 2013

where can I find the form? I live in Islington can I still complete it?

quince · November 2013

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Here:</font><div style="font-family: Arial, Verdana; font-size: 10pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"><br></div><div><font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/haringey-snap-survey.htm?k=138071533998</font></div>;

Mirandola · November 2013

(Caveat: I haven't thought properly about this yet so don't have a view. I also know very little about the internal workings of Haringey Council. I just like playing the suppose game.) Suppose you were the leader of Haringey Council. You get most of your funding (around 3/4 I think) from central government. That funding has been cut. The majority of your spending is stuff you are legally obliged to do, so you can't cut that. In other areas you can cut legally, but you'll be very unpopular - e.g. libraries. You can't (I think) borrow. Assume, finally and for the purposes of this game, that you can't make all the necessary savings through cutting waste/ fat cat salaries. So you need to raise money. If not through leasing the park, how?

gardener-joe · November 2013

@Mirandola. Oh I see ... how selfish we have been ... so it is (isn't it always?) about the bigger picture ... we should roll over for the greater good and green-light this action by a creaking administration that (according to polls) the majority of SG residents did not vote for, and (self evidently) those affected in adjacent borough's did not vote for? The monetary-peanuts raised will stop the metaphorical Haringey camel's back from breaking? Effective Statutory Consultation? I think none. Bring on the lest case.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Top Posters

Concerts in the Park

Comments