A few months ago I wrote a blog post asking where our Park Plan was.
In the middle of September we were invited to an open consultation to help the council write the Park Plan. There were three sessions where people would share their concerns and aspirations for Platt Fields in a friendly setting with big pieces of paper and marker pens, and on tables where we could talk to one another over a cup of tea.
It got you thinking. What do I want from the big park on my doorstep? Well, everything now I think about it! Except it’s not on my doorstep any more, sadly. More on that another time.
Afterwards I asked people who were there whether they were any clearer on what Platt Fields might look like in the future. Resoundingly the answer has been no. The problem is in the method. If you ask the public-at-large what they want from a park you’ll get a whole range of answers. Boats back on the lake, a café (who doesn’t?), for some people more trees and nature, for others more formal gardens and tidy lawns. From this wide range of answers you can cherry pick the bits you want and tick the consultation box.
You would expect a park plan consultation to ask the public how many events a year are enough? Or which facilities need to be prioritised? But the tasks were so open-ended that I found people trying to shoehorn their very specific concerns into the blue-sky thinking format. There was no room for detail or discussion about the challenges we face, particularly the financial ones.
But while we were all asked what our wildest dreams for Platt Fields would be, naturally the council already have their own ideas.
In February this year there was an update to the Environment Scrutiny Committee on the delivery of the park strategy and an “overview of a refreshed delivery plan”. Along with a renewed focus on all things climate change there is going to be more consideration of equality, diversity and inclusion following Covid-19 concerning access to green space. I won’t go into all the details but you can read the whole thing here: https://democracy.manchester.gov.uk/documents/s45212/Park%20Strategy%20Update.pdf
From now until 2027, working with partners and volunteer organisations is also going to be a key feature of the park strategy. “A co-operative and collaborative approach to investment, upkeep and activation” (whatever activation is!).
But most enticing of all is something found in Apendix 1 Parks Investment Update.
Here is £1m allocated for a Platt Fields Hub: “Investment into the existing building stock in delivering a food and beverage offer, community space, office space with a return on investment. Increasing dwell time and utilising the settings (formal gardens, waterside locations, etc).” Is this the so-called Super Plan I wonder?
More interestingly, where is that £1m coming from? It wasn’t down the back of the sofa.
What’s most concerning to me is that in the consultation we were all asked to express our concerns and aspirations for Platt Fields, but here is evidence from back in February suggesting a fairly serious decision which is already seven months old (along with most other things in the re-vamped park strategy). Why have a public consultation on a park plan without mentioning what is already in development?
This recent consultation was an opportunity to tell us about the plans for Platt Fields in the short and long term. I worry there’s a feeling amongst staff to keep secret anything that might be contentious. What if they promise a project but then the money isn’t available, for example?
Or what if your plans involve some private investment based on certain conditions on other businesses and food and beverage offers in the park?
We’re all grown-ups here. We know the council is strapped for cash. Furthermore the public aren’t just complain-a-holics, a lot of us work and volunteer our labour here. If part of the strategy is to work with partner organisations and volunteers it would help to be transparent and up-front. We shouldn’t be scared of debate or hide difficult decisions from each other.
This consultation was a missed opportunity to get something meaningful from a community of key park stakeholders given the current park strategy themes. It was also a missed opportunity to get backing for plans already underway. The friends and other organisations I’ve spoken to feel increasingly detached from the overall plan for Platt Fields. It felt to me like a waste of time to be honest. A public consultation that doesn’t consult the public on any plans isn’t really worth anything.
There is real value in getting us all to work together. Cash value, in fact. For example Platt Hall is run by the galleries service. If they spend money on the surrounding park, like Whitworth Art Gallery does, it isn’t even accounted for in the Platt Fields budget. When the Market Garden put on a programme of activity for children, the value of that isn’t counted either.
If we all worked together we would soon see the value of what each partner brings to the park as a whole. If we could communicate with management there’s no reason we couldn’t apply for joint bids and get some serious investment. It’s worth reiterating that this is all already part of the Parks Strategy! This is “a co-operative and collaborative approach to investment, upkeep and activation.”
This recent consultation hasn’t got us anywhere, unfortunately. There’s still no date for a published park plan. The mood in that room was uneasy with lots of impassioned speeches. The staff are tired. Many people didn’t even turn up, such is their faith in the management. Knowing what we already know, it felt like a stitch-up.
