April 2009 - HYDE PARK AND WOODHOUSE ONLINE

YEP Editorial: 29 April 2009

Moor is not an extension of campus

On the 29 April the Yorkshire Evening Post lead with a scathing editorial on Council proposals to sink concrete blocks onto Woodhouse Moor to accommodate barbecues. Part of the editorial is quoted below, with the kind permission of the editor.

“It is scarcely credible that Leeds City Council has reacted to the spread of illegal barbecues on Woodhouse Moor with plans to sink dozens of concrete slabs into the turf to allow them to continue. The area would consist of 40 slabs, each measuring 60cm by 90cm on which portable barbecues could be used. The idea has left residents and community groups wondering who poses the biggest threat to the moor: those who start barbecues there or council chiefs who would tackle the problem in such a ridiculous way.

“Council bosses would do well to remember that Woodhouse Moor belongs to the City of Leeds and its people – not to those who come to study here for half of the year. And while students are very welcome, contributing as they do to the life and and economy of the city, Woodhouse Moor is not an extension of the university campus.

The YEP’s view is that the council would be far better employed making efforts to ensure that those coming to study in Leeds learn to understand exactly where the campus ends and the rest of the city begins. Click here to read the full article.

Problems ahead on the roads

Barbeques are illegal in all the city’s parks. So if a designated barbeque area gets built on Woodhouse Moor, it will be the only place in Leeds where people can have a barbeque in a park without fear of being prosecuted. The inevitable consequence will be that the Woodhouse Moor Designated Barbeque Area will attract people from all over the city and beyond, just as the skatepark already attracts people from a very wide area. This will mean that our roads will become even more congested, and parking for residents will become ever more difficult. What consideration have Parks and Countryside given to this ? As much as you can see with your eyes shut.

Consultation Event

If the designated barbeque area ever gets built, it’s going to need a name. The current favourites (which nobody will admit to having suggested) are “The Penny Ewens Designated Barbeque Area” and “The Jamie Matthews Designated Barbeque Area”. We rejected the idea of having a total ban on having a name on the ground that it would be far too costly and difficult to police.

Ten thousand survey forms will be delivered to every household within 800 metres of the park, so that everyone can have a say on which name they prefer. The forms will be delivered by a private company because their quote was so much cheaper than the Royal Mail. We chose “There’s One Born Every Minute Leaflet Distribution” because they have a website which says “We Won’t Let You Down”.

If you vote for “The Penny Ewens Designated Barbeque Area” please give a very good reason in the box provided. Otherwise your vote will be disregarded. Your vote will also be disregarded if you fail to provide an NUS membership number.

The deadline for the return of the survey forms is the 23rd April to be determined.

(photo courtesy of Leap Kye)

Whose idea was it anyway ?

According to Greek myth, the goddess Athena was born fully grown. In modern times we’re much too sophisticated to believe that such a thing could have happened. But apparently we’d be wrong. For our councillors are now telling us that the proposal to build designated barbeque areas on Woodhouse Moor just appeared, and had nothing whatsoever to do with them. Just how likely is this ? For a clue, let’s go back to July 2008 and examine the timetable of events :

At an INWAC meeting on the 3rd July 2008 Councillor Hamilton and Councillor Matthews both spoke in favour of barbeques, with Councillor Hamilton saying that he had changed his mind about barbeques and now favoured barbeque areas on the Moor.
On the 2nd September 2008, the council’s Executive Board gave its approval to a proposed change in the wording of the city’s parks byelaws. Whereas previously the byelaws had said it was an offence to light a fire anywhere outside a “designated camping area”, they were now to say it would be an offence to light a fire anywhere outside a “designated barbeque area”.
On the 17th December 2008, central government gave its approval to Leeds’ proposed change to the wording of the byelaws.
Then in early March 2009, laminated A3 colour posters appeared on a large number of trees on Woodhouse Moor asking “Do you want to barbeque on Woodhouse Moor?” and advertising drop-in sessions to be held at the Student Union Building and the Bowls Pavilion.

So, how likely is it that our councillors had nothing to do with this proposal ? You don’t need the wisdom of Athena to come up with the answer.

(photo courtesy of a_cloudless_sky)

‘Barb’ed Letter to Councillors

Hello Councillor,
I have been a resident of Woodhouse and Hyde Park for nearly 30 years.
I have noticed that recently Leeds City Council have been increasingly treating Woodhouse Moor and the adjacent land as though it is their private property and making important decisions that affect the local residents without bothering to consult them. Most of these decisions seem to be aimed at pleasing the transient student population with disregard to the wishes of the permanent tax-paying citizens, and (in my opinion) are somewhat short-sighted.
If you build permanent barbecue sites on the Moor you not only legitimise barbecues but actually encourage them. Rather like building bigger and more roads inevitably just attracts more vehicles, building a mere 40 sites will only encourage hundreds more into setting up destructive fire pits. The difference is; You’ve just invited them.
As I understand it, around Twenty thousand pounds has been allocated for this proposal.
Why not use that money towards employing a Park Keeper to oversee the Moor, liase with Police, and enforce the bylaws?
Woodhouse Moor is fine as it is, it doesn’t need irreversable changes which seem to me to be shortsighted attempts at making a political mark (however well meant) rather than properly considered and debated decisions.
Please Consider or Reconsider this proposal very carefully, and take into account the opinions of long-term local residents like myself who think this is a bad idea.
Yours Sincerely
Si Denbigh
Woodhouse & Hyde Park

HIGH-HANDED COUNCILLORS SILENCE OPPOSITION TO BBQs ON THE MOOR

I attended the recent INWAC Meeting on 2^nd April, 09 and came away extremely disappointed by the way in which the meeting was conducted. There were a number of points that showed the behaviour of some INWAC Councillors to be unseemly.

1. The Chairman of the meeting, Councillor Monaghan, was curt to several members of the public when he forcibly prevented proper debate concerning BBQs on Woodhouse Moor in the Open Forum. If these meetings are intended to involve the public in the consultation process, then this one failed. Large numbers of the public attended the opening but walked out feeling disenfranchised because they were prevented from speaking.

2. At the last INWAC meeting, held in February, a considerable amount of time was given over to the Open Forum to discuss 4 different local matters; 3 of which had little or no impact on the majority of Inner North West residents. Yet at this meeting a time block was put on BBQ’s, an issue which has relevance to and an impact on far more people than for example, the BMX track!

3. Councillor Atha made clear and well argued points against the proposal to authorise BBQs and was shouted down in the brouhaha style used in parliamentary politics at Westminster. Points of order were flying about as political scores were being settled by Councillors and the public were left totally unclear about why Councillor Atha’s proposal was ousted.

4. Councillor Ewens stated that a public consultation exercise was in process about BBQs so debate at this meeting was unnecessary. The fact is that most local, permanent residents have been excluded from the ballot about BBQs due to the undemocratic methods used to illicit opinion. That point was clearly made by Martin Staniforth (Chair of NHPNA) and accepted b y Councillor Matthews.

5. Permanent residents, who will be paying for the designated BBQ pitches and for the clear-up operations from the BBQs /bonfires that will inevitably be lit elsewhere, have not been consulted effectively. Yet the transient population of students, none of whom pay Council Tax and many of whom are not on the electoral roll in Leeds, have been enabled to voice their views freely. Consequently the results of the ballot are likely to be skewed.

6. In terms of the balance of arguments, although Councillor Matthews was the only member to actually voice his support for authorising BBQs on the Moor, one was left thinking that he was backed by the other Lib-Dem Councillors. He seemed to be saying that it was easier to take the line of least resistance to the hooligans who wantonly despoil Woodhouse Moor with their bonfires by providing them a designated area. The Council seems to be able to enforce a BBQ ban in other Leeds parks to counter the potential of environmental damage caused by fire. Why is this park different and why should it not be offered the same protection against damage as those in more affluent areas such as Roundhay?

7. Finally, the acoustics in the Jubilee Room were poor and it was difficult to hear what was being said by many of the Councillors and officers. This could have been rectified had a public address system been used or more simply, each individual should stand up and turn to address the public in a clear voice.

Overall I was not left with a very favourable impression of the way in which some INWAC Councillors use their elected power to represent those of us who are permanent residents in the city, who pay their Council Tax and who exercise their vote because they are on the electoral register.

Marian Smith, 19^th April 09

Null and Void

We were advised that 10,000 questionnaires would be delivered to households within 800m of Woodhouse Moor. I live within that perimeter, it is now 15/04/09, and I am still waiting, as are most of my neighbours. I know of precisely 1 who has received it. Something is up. Options follow:

Council Officers lied (which I do not wish to think.)
There has been a massive administrative bungle (wholly believable.)
The private company retained to do the delivery has dumped most of the stuff and run off chuckling with the money (also wholly believable, and it wants looking into.)

In any case, this presumably renders the Consultation null and void.

(photo courtesy of net_efekt)

Gerrymandered – That’s John Illingworth’s view

“It is interesting to compare and contrast the current council “consultation” on Woodhouse Moor with a previous council “consultation” in Kirkstall in 2006 on the future of the Kirkstall Mills. Both operations apparently had the same purpose, which was to solicit public support for something that the council’s officers had already decided to do. Neither exercise followed the clearly defined rules for a local planning consultation, which to my mind is the obvious model to adopt. The barbecue “consultation” uses different techniques (to the Kirkstall consultation) to achieve a similar gerrymandered result. Once again there is no effective check on the ballot papers and some of the information circulated by the council is misleading or wrong. In contrast to Kirkstall, which had a very tight closing date, the barbecue version seems an indeterminate exercise. Cynics might consider that the distribution has been delayed to avoid the university vacations and increase the likelihood of the desired outcome. An undemocratic choice of question has been used to prematurely close down the debate.

“It is good to see the flame of democracy burning bright ! Leeds City Council should give lessons to Robert Mugabe or Kim Jong-il. I cannot see the justification for perverse consultation techniques, when there is a perfectly good model available which has stood the test of time. A traditional planning consultation under the “Compact for Leeds” would last for 12 weeks, and would be open to anybody who submitted a written response which included their name and address. There would be no artificial boundaries and the consultation would be open to anybody with sufficient motivation to write. All the responses would come from named individuals and be available for others to read. This is less about drumming up votes and more about reasoned discussion and public debate”.

(published by kind permission of John Illingworth)

INWAC stifles debate on barbeque areas

Local residents left last night’s INWAC meeting outraged at the way debate on the barbeque proposal was stifled. People had gone to the meeting to hear councillors respond to the community’s assertion that barbeque areas are a bad idea. But only three members of the community were allowed to speak. One of those prevented from speaking was Sue Buckle, chair of South Headingley Community Association. Several of her members live very close to the Moor and are badly affected by barbeque smoke drifting into their homes. By not allowing Sue to speak on their behalf, her members were effectively denied a hearing. When Councillor Atha proposed a motion that the consultation be abandoned and that the existing ban on barbeques be enforced, the Lib Dem councillors vetoed his motion.

Our councillors remind me of the proverb of the Three Monkeys. They won’t hear anyone speak against barbeques areas, they refuse to see the negative aspects of barbeque areas, and they try to avoid expressing an opinion on barbeque areas.

The above photograph of the Three Monkeys is published courtesy of Antrix.

The Council Has Concrete Plans for the Moor

Local residents came to Wrangthorn Church Hall this afternoon to protest against Leeds City Council’s plan to establish barbeque areas on the Moor. The plan involves sinking forty concrete slabs to a depth of 60cm on the most attractive part of the Moor in the hope that barbeque-ers will use the slabs to barbeque on instead of burning the grass. Council officers have costed the scheme at £20,000. On a hot day there can be 5,000 people on the Moor and hundreds of barbeques. Officers were unable to suggest where the excess over forty should conduct their barbeques. Leeds City Council seem to have forgotten that they distributed concrete slabs in this very area three years ago but barbeque-ers used the slabs to provide a stable base for wine glasses and bottles instead of for barbeques! They said the closing date for getting forms back to them by is the 23rd April. Many residents pointed out that their own streets had had no survey forms delivered. One of the council officers said if people haven’t had a form, they should email him and he’ll send them one. The question was then put to him “What about the people who should had a form but don’t know they should have had a form?” He seemed unable to provide a response to that question.