Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As of this weekend, the children were playing there because someone has purposefully pulled down a section of fencing and lots of irresponsible parents were allowing their children to play in that area. My husband and I managed to avert one accident by stopping two little boys from trying to climb over a section of the spiky fence because they hadn't realised it was breached elsewhere. The new equipment may well not have been signed off as safe yet so i can't imagine how stupid those parents have to be to allow their little ones in there. Hopefully the fence is reinstated or the new section opened fully soonest.

Ironic that equipment designed to be played on by children needs 10 meetings of bureaucrats

to sanction the equipment as safe ...


...when children have been encouraged to play and climb on the new Pipe Sculptures which were

never primarily designed for that purpose.


Call me Old Fashioned..


Foxy

SLad Wrote:

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

> The new equipment may well not have been signed

> off as safe yet so i can't imagine how stupid

> those parents have to be to allow their little

> ones in there. Hopefully the fence is reinstated

> or the new section opened fully soonest.


That's possible, but I'd think it more likely that the fencing is there, as has been is in other parts of the park, to allow the grass to grow over the new landscape. All the new slopes will need something to hold them together, and grass does that quite well, but only if the root systems are allowed to develop properly.


If that doesn't happen, you'll get a lot of erosion and mud, and further costs to put it right again, which will mean less money for maintaining other things.

SLad Wrote:

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

> As of this weekend, the children were playing

> there because someone has purposefully pulled down

> a section of fencing and lots of irresponsible

> parents were allowing their children to play in

> that area. My husband and I managed to avert one

> accident by stopping two little boys from trying

> to climb over a section of the spiky fence because

> they hadn't realised it was breached elsewhere.

> The new equipment may well not have been signed

> off as safe yet so i can't imagine how stupid

> those parents have to be to allow their little

> ones in there. Hopefully the fence is reinstated

> or the new section opened fully soonest.



This has been going on for a few weeks, makes me so cross. Parents don't lift a finger to stop it, and so you look like a right mean bastard when you tell your kid that they can't join in.

Or... How about not putting up a pointless fence around a playground that kids can see but not touch?


The newly laid turf wasn't watered properly and didn't take in some areas, then the grass was left to over-grow rather than being promptly cut to encourage vigorous growth - exactly not the way to treat newly laid/seeded turf.


The opening was delayed by pointless incompetence/indifference.

Marcus Wrote:

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

> Or... How about not putting up a pointless fence

> around a playground that kids can see but not

> touch?



When I was there (couple of weeks back)it certainly wasn't a pointless fence. It was a fence to stop kids playing on unfinished and potentially dangerous equipment.


I'm not one for wrapping kids in cotton wool, but I'd rather them be kept away from unfinished equipment.

Otta Wrote:


>

> This has been going on for a few weeks, makes me

> so cross. Parents don't lift a finger to stop it,

> and so you look like a right mean bastard when you

> tell your kid that they can't join in.



Tell me about it. I almost became the world's worst Aunt when I told my niece and nephew they weren't allowed to play on it. Luckily they were sated when they got to play on the brilliant new bits of play equipment which have been opened up at the end.


Who knows why the fence hasn't been removed yet (I assumed a final safety sign off which could well include the risks posed from allowing small children to clamber all over relatively steep banks without bedded in turf), but in addition to my safety concerns I have this weird and rather old-fashioned belief that certain things should be observed like spiky fences keeping little ones out of unfinished play areas.

Well - also what is the idea behind the new long low (climbing?) wall in the playground? Kids walk along the top but have to jump down (more or less safely given the height at the far end) and cannot pass each other easily if going in opposite directions on top.


It seems to me not such a great revamp, e.g. compare it with the playground in Brockwell park.


Z

As others said, I feel they should have taken inspiration from Brockwell Park playground that have utilised every inch of the space in exciting and different ways. Dulwich Park has so much to offer and yet the playground is lacklustre and uninspiring. They had so much space to really make something exciting and original and yet they have used so little of the available space and come up with something disappointing. Same with the playground in Peckham Rye. Do they not consult with parents or users of the playground as to what they want before re-designs?

As a Dulwich Park Friends committee member and long time volunteer, I'd highly recommend that you join the Friends (app form at dulwichparkfriends.org.uk) if you want to influence what happens in the park. We notify our members of plans and projects and invite comments. The consultation over the floodworks and related benefits for the park lasted 18 months and was widely publicised.


I will relay comments about the wall to the park manager - you can do this too, his contact details are on the Friends' website or Southwark's parks website. As to the playground, it's very subjective as to what is 'right'. I have had many comments direct about how enjoyable it is to have grassy, open, dog-free space for picnics and play. There is a cost factor too. The original playground was created after a big fundraising by the Friends. Volunteers are always welcome to help with keeping the park so pleasant to visit! Not least, we have a (more or less) monthly 'Dig the Park' where we work on planting and conservation work. Kids welcome, under supervision.


Trevor Moore

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

    • Thank you, I will be vigilant
    • @Sue said: nobody is blaming the child, they are blaming the person who should have been watching him g) do you really think it was acceptable for that person to find the situation funny? This is the point. Adults are meant to teach their children by example. It sounds as though the adult guardian/ father in this case did not react appropriately. Had a truly sincere apology been given,  I suspect the OP would not have posted on here. It is possible the OP snapped in the heat of the moment, but they were possibly startled because they were hit from behind? If we are startled it can be instinctive to initially react with anger. I also agree that it would be highly irresponsible to let any very young child ride or walk or do anything on a busy public street without supervision- most of all to protect the child. If in this case the child was out of the adult's line of sight that is perhaps another indication that the father needs a refresh in appropriate behaviour around a child, as well as his manners.
    • Malumbu,  if none of us were there, does that mean that nobody should post anything on here unless they have witnesses from the EDF? Why would someone post something like this if it  wasn't true? This is not about whether children should or should not be cycling on the pavement. There are specific issues. a) the child was out of sight of the person supposed to be caring for him b) he appears to have been  either not looking where he was going or was out of control of the bike c) if he did see that he was about to hit someone  he apparently did not give them any kind of warning  d)  a person was unexpectedly hit from behind whilst just walking along, which in my view makes him a victim e) does the title of the thread really matter as the issue was described in the first post?  f) nobody is blaming the child, they are blaming the person who should have been watching him g) do you really think it was acceptable for that person to find the situation funny? The OP was not complaining about the 4 year old. They were complaining about an adult's lack of supervision of a 4 year old who was not capable of riding a bike and who hit someone from behind with no warning. Also, apart from reading the OP more carefully, perhaps also choose your words more carefully. Jobless? Lunatic? Charming.
    • I have to say, I too am upset about the passing of DulwichFox. He was a real local character, who unlike me, managed to stick with ED despite all of the nauseous yuppification of the last three decades. R.I.P to foxy    Louisa. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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