Dunraven

Fair question, am just trying to get people to post own views on changes and point out that the apparent consulting of local people hasn't actually happened rather we are being told what is going to happen. Most local people once they see the plans think they are bonkers, hope this explains.

Exactly, apparently its a done deal,as this was announced on their website on the 7th of February way before they made any minor nod in the direction of pretending to 'consult' local people. The 'Building Exploratory'- I quote 'helps people discover the secrets of their local area and gain better understanding of the buildings and spaces that surround them' Ive lived here for 25 years I don't need someone from Hackney help me to discover my local area and tell me what they think should change- I digress furthermore, they claim to 'sepcialise(sic)-don't know what that means doesn't sound very nice 'in creating opportunities for people to engage creatively in changes taking place in their local area' well their you have it what a load of old tosh and this lot are getting funding from National Lottery and National Heritage for this!!!! Who thinks getting rid of play area and moving it onto the common is a good idea? anyone want to sit their whilst kids are playing with sound of traffic going past on main thoroughfare through park, much more convenient to have it near to Adventure where bigger kids can go independently, who thinks mixing provision for under 5's and 7-14 year olds,is a good idea? and why should Adventure which is well used lose its all weather courts, the only ones in the local area, this doesn't make sense, who gains from this? Any answers please people.

Starting new thread on this one,did anyone go to any of the 'time to talk' sessions re changes happening in Peckham Rye Park? Does anyone else out there think that they do not make sense and are going to cost a huge amount of money and cause a whole load of unnecessary disruption to somewhere that nearly everyone likes as it is? Aright some of it could do with the odd bit of re furbishment here and there and better path and lighting to East side v carpark and 'upper' Nunhead but do local people really want a radicle overhaul of sites and removal of facilities across play provision in park? Comments please.

Decided to start new thread on this one as original post seems to be more spin than thread. Can anyone explain why you would change all play provision in Peckham Rye Park at huge expense and disruption when it all works well where it is? The 1,0 Clock club has been on their centrally located site for over 30 years and serves people caring for young children from across the borough, near to bus stops, car park and cafe, fine rebuild it, if its 'not fit for purpose' (sic) don't understand why this wasn't done when closed down last time and why play space was cut in half and why 'stream' which cost huge amount of money (heard 30,000 plus) and has never worked was put in, hey ho! Carib football Club have said they want to stay were they are, again fine give them a permanent building and some changing facilities but they don't need a huge amount of space they are mainly off on pitches playing football. Why get rid of play space round corner from Adventure,re-do it yes but don't get rid of it, who wants to sit on the common on main thoroughfare whilst kids are in new 'multi complex' play area on current 1,)Clock club site? And why at a time when we have seen steady erosion of play provision for 7-14 yrs olds would Labour Councillors be backing the hacking up and removal of only all weather football courts in area in brilliant well used Adventure Playground.Consultancy was more a case of we are here to tell you what is happening, I think if people don't like the changes put forward by a group of people who appear not to know the park very well we should object-anybody else got any thoughts on this?

Renata, apparently your information about the trees is incorrect, one of the 'consultants' and several other people in the know have informed me that there is no reason why the 1'0, Clock club cannot be rebuilt on the footprint it currently has. At the consultancy meeting at the Adventure, which only happened by the way because local people asked to see the plans,up until that there was no intention of coming to discuss the changes.Various and increasingly hilarious reasons for not building on the current site were put forward,-trees,common land laws,fencing, FA changing room rules etc, none of which were in the slightest bit convincing.I think if you ask people you will find that most of them like the way the play provision in the park is laid out as it is, most people don't want the football courts at the Adventure moved over as that impinges on the skate park,they do't want the Adventure extending around the corner and don't want to lose the nearby young children's play area either.Its a park it doesn't need a whole load of new buildings in it taking up even more of the green space.Why does the park need 2.2 million pounds spent on it and how much money has been spent on this so far? If it aint broke don't fix it.