AS elected councillors, parents and former teenagers, we share the sense of loss experienced by the young people who used the Sidings Skate Park.
However, it is regrettable that, despite informing you in advance of our reasons for removing the skate park, your correspondent (July 21) chose to ignore what has become obvious to many responsible adults - that the facility was badly designed and badly positioned and had become a threat to child safety.
With the onset of the school holidays, it would have been irresponsible for us to leave it.
Firstly, the equipment was regularly vandalised, making it unsafe to use.
At one point a bolt had been loosened.
Secondly, because it was not overlooked, younger children such as those quoted in your article were at risk.
One boy was assaulted and robbed.
And finally, because it was not overlooked, it acted as a focus for anti-social behaviour, contravening the Crime and Disorder Act.
We agree with Bev Davis that this has been a dreadful waste of money, but it need not have been like this.
If Liz Edge and those responsible for the skate park had listened to concerned residents and consulted the police, we would not be in this position.
There is a national standard for this, it is called Safety By Design (SBD).
It is typical of the high-handed arrogance of the late Labour administration that they thought they knew better.
A priority for the new city council will be to listen to expert and local advice to anticipate such problems before they arise.
Meanwhile, we will seek to provide an alternative location for these facilities that does not expose children to unnecessary risks.
Martin Bartlett, Bill Fairclough and Gil Nimmo,
Holgate ward councillors, Scarcroft Road, York.
...IS this the shape of things to come from the new political administration running City of York Council?
I refer to the closure of the skate park in Holgate Park.
Putting to one side the distress to local youngsters of losing a valuable recreational facility, on whose authority was the decision to remove the skate park given?
The streamlining of local government was intended to speed up the decision-making process and give greater transparency to council procedures. It does not give the green light to bypass democratic accountability.
Thousands of pounds have been spent on this facility, hundreds to remove it and presumably thousands to replace it. This is public money, our money being used here.
Who was consulted and who made the decision to write off thousands of pounds of public money?
This action is a classic case of attacking the symptom not the cause.
Surely it was not beyond the wit of the council and other interested parties to come up with a strategy that would have met the concerns of some local residents while, at the same time, retaining a valuable recreational facility aimed for children?
Peter Finlay,
Hobgate, York.
Updated: 11:06 Friday, July 25, 2003
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article