Plans to revamp Barnard Park

• JACK Scrafton, a bright, engaged and articulate boy who is passionate about football, is perfectly capable of writing his letter (Seven-a-side pitch will be way too small, September 29) but I have no doubt that his parents might have had input into it. Isn’t that what parents do?

But I hope Jack didn’t get to read the rather patronising letter (Taking sides in the Barnard Park debate, October 6) and be dissuaded from further engagement in a subject which is very dear to him and lots of his friends. The letter was mean-spirited.

I would also reject the claim that the Tribune takes the side of an “Islington unknown to most who live here”.

My husband moved to Islington in 1984 and our neighbour is third generation, but like Jack we are appalled by the Labour council plans for the pitch at Barnard Park.

R Brown (We need to open up park so everyone can use it, October 6) is just misguided. It is an “old” football pitch, but the council rejected contributions from the Football Association, Rugby Football Union and others to refurbish it.

State schools cannot even use it on health and safety grounds, through the council’s neglect. It is surrounded by vibrant communities, but those communities need some place to play proper sport.

A hundred children aged six to 12-13 train and play soccer every week on the pitch. So why isn’t it “practical for young children”? It is all they have. No footballer or rugby player wants a seven-a-side pitch. The Highbury Wolves will have to go elsewhere and the council will then have further evidence for its claim that the pitch is underused.

The planned footpaths are too narrow and not suitable for running. Nobody has yet sensibly explained how a “flexible grass area” can be used for sport. As things stand, there is plenty of existing green space for dog walkers, picnics and for neighbours to continue to meet.

Save our Pitch group recently spent an evening on the Barnsbury estate canvassing residents. In less than two hours we had more than 100 signatures of people who do not want the pitch reduced but who desperately want it upgraded.

It is inexplicable to us that Barnsbury Estate Local Management Organisation would approve the plans. Nobody has claimed that the consultation was “not made public”.

It was a public consultation but it was poorly advertised, selectively chosen and didn’t even give the option of retaining the pitch – in effect, deeply flawed despite the council having spent more than £417k.

Sport England had serious objections to the council plans and were ignored. The Secretary of State calls in very few planning matters so clearly that body had deep concerns.

Why is it that Friends of Barnard Park and its supporters refuse to accept that upgrading the pitch with the moneys that have been offered by sporting bodies and retaining its current size do not benefit the entire community.

MARGARET ROWE
Save our Pitch group