Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well the point of closing the park at night is for public protection as much as anything. Sure, vandals and the like will get in anyway. I think the Bowling Green hut was burned down while the park was closed for example. But I don't think we should make it as easy as possible for vandals and robbers to get in to the park nor encourage people to be walking in there at night. Unlocked gates would I believe increase the likelihood of crime and vandalism. There is no lighting in the park either.

It's hardly difficult for vandals, robbers or any nimble person to get into the park, the fence is not very high! Anyone who wants to get in can do, quite easily - without even using the bent areas in the fencing. I've seen even the shortest Harris Girls School students clamber over relatively easily.

The difficulty comes for those of us with dogs who can't manage it...


I agree that it would be nice if the council just left it open, there are plenty of local parks that are open all night and day, including Brenchley Gardens and One Tree Hill. I'm not aware of them being local crime hotspots.


People can chose whether they want to walk through in the dark, you would soon realise that there are no lights on the paths.

the parks are locked shut at night time partly to protect people from becoming victims of crime and partly to help protect the huge investment in these parks. it doesn't guarantee no vandalism but it is believed to significantly reduce it.


could the park be unlocked earlier. couldn't the friends of peckham park form a rota to unlock at dawn?

the parks are locked shut at night time partly to protect people from becoming victims of crime and partly to help protect the huge investment in these parks. it doesn't guarantee no vandalism but it is believed to significantly reduce it.



James how exactly does locking the gate achieve these things?


1. Grown ups deciding to walk in the park in the dark can make their own minds up - they don't need the Lib Dems or others to make choices for them.


2. Protecting the huge investment - when anyone reasonably nimble can leap over / squeeze through the existing railings. How does a padlock on a 4 foot gate do this?


3. "Believed" to reduce vandalism - where is your control, how are you measuring this?


Give us all access 24/7 to the park and cut out the cost (in time if not money) of locking and unlocking 7 (?) gates dawn and dusk every day.


Baa humbug - idiotic thinking on the council's part.

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 agree that I enjoy seeing the variety of wild flowers growing naturally in the streets and would much prefer that they were not destroyed. (The South London Botanical Institute actually conduct wildflower identification walks on street wild flowers.) However, as the council consider themselves to be responsible for removing these plants, it's better that they now dig them out rather than spraying them with toxic herbicide, as they used to do - a step in the right direction.
    • It's interesting how local businesses and the people that own / work in them are not considered part of the "community". The dictionary says "a group of people living in the same place" as the principal definition. Why are we forced to accept a secondary definition where those who don't live in social housing, the vast majority of people in East Dulwich, are told to shut up?
    • They often grow in the angle between wall and pavement which could cause damage to the foundation of the wall and leave the council open to being sued.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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