A bit last minute here, but here’s what I’m saying to the Finsbury Park consultation:
Q3. Lock park up at night? Neither agree nor disagree. As the consultation notes, we need a settlement on cycle routes to know what the options are here. Why is it being consulted on now? See also, CCTV, and lighting.
Q4. Removal of benches near the Finsbury Park Gate entrance? Disagree. Whole area from that entrance to Finsbury Park Station entrance needs redesign to (a) encourage better (& non-threatening) uses, and (b) provide for planned cycle routes. It’s a substantial area with some real possibilities; various stakeholders need to be consulted & different design/use alternatives solicited.
Q5. Move small playground from American Gardens area to an unspecified “new location near the centre of the park”. Strongly disagree. Reason for proposed move is that adults often use the playground for workouts, and this is seen as a spillover from the outdoor gym area across the park road. My comment in the box provided:
There is already a playground near the centre of the park; moving the American Gardens playgound is in any case an expensive option.
I walk or cycle past this site almost every day. My impression is that the adults using the playground for exercise do so because the playground equipment & relatively level surface offer some workout options the outdoor gym does not. Best option would be to study what these are & improve the outdoor gym so that it accomodates these users.
Q6. CCTV Neither agree nor disagree. We need a settlement on cycle routes to know what the options are here.
Q7. Implementation of lighting. Neither agree nor disagree. Here, it’s just that the devil is in the detail. That detail is not clear in the consultation – two different lighted routes are mentioned, with different implications. In any case, we need a settlement on cycle routes to know what the options are here.
Q8. Public space protection order. Neither agree nor disagree. I just don’t know enough about what this involves.
Q9a. Traffic management. Option 1: stop public car parking.
Q9b: comment on the above:
Option 2 is to reduce the amount of parking, keeping the scrum between the lake and the basketball courts: don’t see why. Option 3 is bizarre – it would allow electric vehicles only, and install charging points for them. Since charging takes some time, this seems to imply either that the park would be used for overnight car storage, or that it would officially become an electric park & ride stop (plug your car in, and hop on the tube or train to get to work): not a good use of park space.
Finsbury Park is a heavily used green space. It is in a densely populated area which is becoming more dense as tower blocks rise. It is remarkably well connected by public transport. It is surrounded by traffic-clogged streets, to which traffic it currently adds in its own small way. There is no excuse for sacrificing green space in the park for car parking, and for making its roads less safe than they should be for kids on foot & on bikes. Less tarmac, more trees.
Q10. Electric vehicle charging points: Strongly disagree. See comment on Q9, above.
Q11. Other priorities. Drawing from the vast number of things not mentioned in the consultation, I said:
Fewer big events, charge organisers more! Water bottle refill stations. Wider bridge Oxford Rd