Windrush Square used by We Train commercial personal trainer company

[Pickman's model]

maybe a pyre constructed from gym equipment would be appropriate ?

Yeh but I'll be flogging memorial t-shirts, just outside Windrush Square

 

[Black Halo]

there is definitely a question to be asked about use of public space for private gain.

This is what this boils down to, the company are using a public space maintained by public funds to make money, that could be construed as subsidising that business (if they have not paid to use the space).

I'm all for people keeping fit but if a business is using a public space to make money by providing a service then they should contribute to keeping that public space maintained. This is particularly prevalent (as some posters have said) in some of the current fitness fads where a trainer uses a public park as their place of business. In this case Windrush Square is just a lot more visible and disruptive than some corner of Brockwell Park. I have just had a look it is £40 a month with a DirectDebit (or £10 a go) for the bootcamp stuff and with 25 locations in London's public parks are doing OK, do the parks see any of that money?

If they are genuinely free and encouraging people to be more active more power to them. If they are a business they are just trying to get their overheads and running costs paid by the council.

 

[editor]

This is what this boils down to, the company are using a public space maintained by public funds to make money, that could be construed as subsidising that business (if they have not paid to use the space).

I'm all for people keeping fit but if a business is using a public space to make money by providing a service then they should contribute to keeping that public space maintained. This is particularly prevalent (as some posters have said) in some of the current fitness fads where a trainer uses a public park as their place of business. In this case Windrush Square is just a lot more visible and disruptive than some corner of Brockwell Park. I have just had a look it is £40 a month with a DirectDebit (or £10 a go) for the bootcamp stuff and with 25 locations in London's public parks are doing OK, do the parks see any of that money?

If they are genuinely free and encouraging people to be more active more power to them. If they are a business they are just trying to get their overheads and running costs paid by the council.

Spot on. I've just messaged them again seeing as they haven't bothered to reply to my first request. Here's what I asked them. It seems a reasonable question.

Hi. Can you tell me if you got permission from Lambeth for yesterday's session in Windrush Square and if you paid for the pitch? Or was it a flashmob kind of thing?

 

[editor]

I can now confirm that they did NOT get permission from Lambeth or pay anything to use the square for their commercial activities.

 

[snowy_again]

I can't decide whether this is

or

Are they just unware of their idiocy?

 

[bi0boy]

This is what this boils down to, the company are using a public space maintained by public funds to make money, that could be construed as subsidising that business (if they have not paid to use the space).

I'm all for people keeping fit but if a business is using a public space to make money by providing a service then they should contribute to keeping that public space maintained. This is particularly prevalent (as some posters have said) in some of the current fitness fads where a trainer uses a public park as their place of business. In this case Windrush Square is just a lot more visible and disruptive than some corner of Brockwell Park. I have just had a look it is £40 a month with a DirectDebit (or £10 a go) for the bootcamp stuff and with 25 locations in London's public parks are doing OK, do the parks see any of that money?

If they are genuinely free and encouraging people to be more active more power to them. If they are a business they are just trying to get their overheads and running costs paid by the council.

For a park you could argue that there is a potential maintenance cost involved, for example in reseeding worn grass trampled by hordes of joggers brought there by a commercial enterprise. For a square however there are no realistic extra costs incurred by such activity. You could argue there should be a contribution to the capital costs of renewing the paving, but such could equally apply to pavements. Should companies pay a special fee if their staff or customers use pavements? Surely it's dangerous ground to start charging seperately for things that ought to be paid for out of general taxation.

 

[Ted Striker]

Would the world be a better place if the event hadn't happened?

 

[editor]

For a park you could argue that there is a potential maintenance cost involved, for example in reseeding worn grass trampled by hordes of joggers brought there by a commercial enterprise. For a square however there are no realistic extra costs incurred by such activity. You could argue there should be a contribution to the capital costs of renewing the paving, but such could equally apply to pavements. Should companies pay a special fee if their staff or customers use pavements? Surely it's dangerous ground to start charging seperately for things that ought to be paid for out of general taxation.

I'm more concerned about the commercialisation of what is supposed to be public space and the space they're taknig over for their own personal gain. What if five of these operations decided to take their money-making 'flashmob' activities into the square at the same time?

 

[editor]

Would the world be a better place if the event hadn't happened?

Local forum for local issues, etc. They don't have to be all world changing events, but often small things can act as a decent conversation point for bigger issues, in this case the argument about the usage of public squares for private commercial events.

 

[bi0boy]

I'm more concerned about the commercialisation of what is supposed to be public space and the space they're taknig over for their own personal gain. What if five of these operations decided to take their money-making 'flashmob' activities into the square at the same time?

That's a good argument for banning such activities, but is not really an argument for charging a licence fee. In fact a licence system would surely incentivise the council to hand out as many licences as possible in order to extract more income.

 

[Black Halo]

For a square however there are no realistic extra costs incurred by such activity.

Agreed but why should the council provide that particular company a free venue to do business and make money? That is subsiding by another name.

Having a licence fee would include a process where, in theory at least, some kind of thought would go into who was using a space for how long and the aggregate impact all these events/uses would have on a space rather than a free-for-all.

 

[bi0boy]

Having a licence fee would include a process where, in theory at least, some kind of thought would go into who was using a space for how long and the aggregate impact all these events/uses would have on a space rather than a free-for-all.

As long as the fee only covers the costs of administering the licence system and not a profit element for the council.

 

[editor]

As long as the fee only covers the costs of administering the licence system and not a profit element for the council.

And maybe some money that goes into the parks budget to compensate the public for their temporary lack of amenities/space?

(For the record, I'd prefer to have no such commercial activity like this in small public squares, short of true community-focused events).

 

[bi0boy]

And maybe some money that goes into the parks budget to compensate the public for their temporary lack of amenities/space?

It's a difficult one. There has been some hoo-har up here as the council allowed a big winter ice skating and funfair operation that totally trashed a major park. People are against it happening again but the council "need to maximise all available income streams by utilising their assets blah blah". Even if they just used the proceeds on parks that would simply be money freed up to spend on other areas, so there will always be an incentive to encourage commercial events that pay the council a fee unless they're banned altogether.

 

[Gramsci]

That's a good argument for banning such activities, but is not really an argument for charging a licence fee. In fact a licence system would surely incentivise the council to hand out as many licences as possible in order to extract more income.

Given what you have posted are you in favour of an outright ban on commercial activities such as this in public spaces?

 

[bi0boy]

Given what you have posted are you in favour of an outright ban on commercial activities such as this in public spaces?

No I think it should be down to each local authority to assess their public spaces on a case-by-case basis.

 

[Gramsci]

No I think it should be down to each local authority to assess their public spaces on a case-by-case basis.

Im asking you your opinion on this issue re Lambeth public spaces. Not what you think LA should do.

 

[bi0boy]

Im asking you your opinion on this issue re Lambeth public spaces. Not what you think LA should do.

I don't know enough about the full range of public spaces in Lambeth and the utilisation of them by the public to determine what an appropriate policy would be.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Are you new?

CoT has a point. Exercise wankers.

They're even worse than bus wankers.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I hope someone will organise a party for the deaths of liz peck and steve reed in Windrush Square

A party to celebrate their deaths, or to bring about their deaths?

Don't get me wrong, I'm an "either/or" chap. I just want to know, so I know whether to pack a cleaver, some rope and some chilli oil.

 

[ViolentPanda]

maybe a pyre constructed from gym equipment would be appropriate ?

If only I could have salvaged some of the stuff from when Dick Sheppard was demolished.

 

[Pickman's model]

A party to celebrate their deaths, or to bring about their deaths?

Don't get me wrong, I'm an "either/or" chap. I just want to know, so I know whether to pack a cleaver, some rope and some chilli oil.

Once again it's both

 

[ViolentPanda]

Once again it's both

Hooray!!!

 

[Maggot]

I don't like seeing commercial enterprises and advertising creeping into public squares. If you're fine with that, that's fine.

 

[Gramsci]

I don't know enough about the full range of public spaces in Lambeth and the utilisation of them by the public to determine what an appropriate policy would be.

In that case I don't understand why you are posting on this thread.

 

[bi0boy]

In that case I don't understand why you are posting on this thread.

Surely there are general points to be made about the use of public spaces.

 

[Mr Retro]

In my view if you have time to worry about this you're in a pretty good place.

What worries me at the moment are things like my family and their safety, paying the mortgage, trying to find my next contract. I don't give a rattling fuck about half a dozen people training in a park and if they have paid to rent their little space out for 3/4 of an hour or not.

 

[Nanker Phelge]

I blame Thatcher.

 

[discobastard]

In my view if you have time to worry about this you're in a pretty good place.

What worries me at the moment are things like my family and their safety, paying the mortgage, trying to find my next contract. I don't give a rattling fuck about half a dozen people training in a park and if they have paid to rent their little space out for 3/4 of an hour or not.

This is probably the best and most incisive post on this thread.

 

[discobastard]

In that case I don't understand why you are posting on this thread.

With that logic, most people shouldn't be granted a vote for anything.