Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I really don't like the oversized metal frame on the swing. It's a real eyesore and supports a single, very small swing (compared to the usual ones made to this design). The random poles are odd, especially the larger of them and enough has already been said about the water feature and the lack of seating and fencing. Why didn't the council use the money to extend / improve the exiting play area?

We don't really fund this stuff. Council Tax is not the council's only income, and at times like this, when SEN kids are no longer getting transport to school (for example), I think we should be pretty grateful that some money has been found for play areas!


Sometimes it's like people think Southwark Council starts and ends with (the relatively wealthy) East Dulwich.

Ha ha, thanks Otta!


A couple of months on we have enjoyed many trips to the un-fenced play area (now that the kids are at school we're not 1 o'clock club users), and the kids love it. The wooden posts/wobbly boards/wooden beams are, in my humble opinion, fantastic at encouraging them to play and use their imaginations. They are pirate ships, princess castles, gymnastics beams...


Maybe being brought up in NZ (where most local playgrounds had a swing and if you were lucky, a slide, but lots of grass to run around and have fun on, and not a fence in sight) means I don't expect as much from a playground?

I have been put off by a child ending up with dog poo all over it


Sorry if that makes me seem

Churlish


I just don't understand why no fence? It seems elementary


My children love to climb the logs in the picnic Area, do no problem with 'natural play'


I just prefer not to combine it with heaps of dog shit

That's not strictly true though Saffron - the 1 o'clock club was fenced, and still is in it's revamped format. The new play area isn't part of the 1 o'clock club.


In terms of facilities for toddlers there's been no real change other than the space being utilised in a different way.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We don't really fund this stuff. Council Tax is

> not the council's only income, and at times like

> this, when SEN kids are no longer getting

> transport to school (for example), I think we

> should be pretty grateful that some money has been

> found for play areas!

>

> Sometimes it's like people think Southwark Council

> starts and ends with (the relatively wealthy) East

>


Peckham isn't a relatively wealthy area, not that this is particularly relavent. One shouldn't be grateful simply because money is being spent, when it may not be getting spent wisely. Southwark council is funded by the taxpayer, So yes it is our money being spent.

Pickle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's not strictly true though Saffron - the 1

> o'clock club was fenced, and still is in it's

> revamped format. The new play area isn't part of

> the 1 o'clock club.


Fair enough. And this thread is actually about the 1 o'clock club. But...


>

> In terms of facilities for toddlers there's been

> no real change other than the space being utilised

> in a different way.



...and that's a great shame, considering the time and effort put into altering this area. It's frustrating that the equipment, like climbing frames, aimed at older childen is so exclusive of toddlers. There are ways that such equipment could have been made to accomodate both.


As far as fencing goes in general, I too grew in an area with a lot of unfenced playgrouds. I feel like for my experience at least, it can't be compared. This is b/c with such wide open spaces, there was plenty of room for dogs and cycles w/o clashing with children's play areas. This doesn't seem to be the case in so many play areas in London. The dog poo issue really puts me off.


Indeed with all the ongoing issues, Little Saff and I have been avoiding P Rye 1 o'clock club and associated play area in favour of CP 1 o'clock club and park. I know we're not the only ones doing this. It all adds up to lost revenue for the cafe and PR 1 o'clock club, which is really unfortunate b/c it's otherwise such a nice area.


If cost is an issue for the area not belonging to the 1 o'clock club, could a smaller fence be put around just the equipment/area where toddlers play? xx

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Edit, because I really can't be bothered arguing.


Yes, arguing can become counter productive. Actually it's a decent play area, with a few issues. It would just be wonderful if after all the time and effort spent, a few details could be proactively addressed so that it could be a GREAT play area. xx

Went down today and heaved 4 children over the fence into the toddler area!

I keep seeing that that area is still available for little ones. It if that's so.

, shouldnt there be an unlocked gate?


ESP since the one o'c club is no longer open every day

Yes, I second Fuschia's question - my toddler isn't really keen on the unfenced stuff, so stood crying at the gate and pointing at the coloured equipment within the locked gated area yesterday. Next time I shall do as Fuschia did and just lift him over.

There were lots of children in there! Only thing us you can't lift a buggy over


But I am sure from what I read, it was planned that the fenced off area would be available when the one o'c club was shut


Certainly that was in the original plans and I think renata mentioned it recently

Fushia-I'm waiting for answers to my questions on fencing etc

Pickle- the reduced days are due to staff shortages, as the current funding/contracts run until April next year some staff have left.



In terms of the one O clock club future in general, Vikki, Gavin and I were at a meeting last night to discuss the future of the club. We are totally committed for there to be a one O clock club. It would cost 6 pounds per child per visit to run the service as it is, we gave the thumbs down to charging for the club. The current building is a ex-POW hut and not fit for purpose. The substantial costs to build a new building have been secured. There are funds to pay for the upkeep and running costs of the building and for toys/equipment. Southwark has 5 one O clock clubs. 2 will be run by local childrens centres who will get use of the premises of these clubs. In terms of Peckham Rye club, the same avenue is currently being explored with local children's centres. This would mean they would run the one O clock club. The other althernative is that parents would run the club, with a designated steering group being in charge of Keys and keeping the place clean and tidy, etc. We would like to have a meeting with local residents who have a interest in the club in mid-November. Please contact me or post here to let me know if you prefer a daytime or evening meeting (times?) where you would like it held and we are looking at dates with council officers.


In terms of rebuilding, this would probably happen around next April and could mean that the club would close for 3-4 months while the new building goes up.



Renata

Renata - that's great news - I'm so pleased to hear that the service will continue in some form - children's centres are Sure Start centres? I assume that there would still be open sessions with the same regularity as presently? I'd vote for an evening meeting - anywhere local would suit. Many thanks.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I went to France recently and in the city I visited there were large billboards on the main streets urging people to stop their dogs from messing on the streets and in a little park a sign said something to the effect that this park was built for your enjoyment not as a dumping ground for dog mess. There were also big signs about not fly tipping. I wonder if councils are too worried about offending dog owners by making a fuss about this major problem. I was a dog owner for many years, got free bags from the council and there were even bins around then.
    • I was also woken by this. It happened in two bursts, which felt even more anti social.
    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...