SE23.com
The community website for Forest Hill and Honor Oak, London SE23
Events | Features | Forum | Local Books | Contact
 

Forum Archive
Playgrounds in Forest Hill

Author Message
Janey
Joined N/A
Posted on Friday, 03 December, 2004 - 10:28 pm:   

Forest Hill always has been, and is increasingly so, a family area. Why then do we have such poor playground facilities? The Horniman Triangle playground is neglected, and every time it rains (which let's face it, is rather a lot),it turns into a quagmire. The playground at One Tree Hill is OK but not really satisfactory given the number of kids living nearby. Treking to Dulwich Park is an option of course but then you have to queue behind Jake, Flora and Max for a go on the slide.

So for the counsellors who avidly read these pages...we need something better.
Mia
Joined N/A
Posted on Friday, 03 December, 2004 - 10:47 pm:   

I agree - I have also had this problem. Having lived in many parts of London I was shocked to find such lack of playgrounds and facilities for children in Forest Hill.
Les
Joined N/A
Posted on Saturday, 04 December, 2004 - 02:23 pm:   

I agree - there's good stuff at Crystal Palace dino park, but something within walking distance is needed.
Sara
Joined N/A
Posted on Sunday, 05 December, 2004 - 07:43 pm:   

Could the lack of playground facilities be an item for the agenda at the steering group (see other thread)? Compared to other parts of London, we are really impoverished re. children's facilities.
Maria
Joined N/A
Posted on Monday, 06 December, 2004 - 09:18 pm:   

I lived in Spain for years and the contrast between the playgrounds there and here in Forest Hill is remarkable. Why are they so low on the council's budget? Facilities for young children should be of fundamental importance.
Cllr David Whiting
Joined N/A
Posted on Monday, 06 December, 2004 - 10:16 pm:   

I'm very happy for this matter to be discussed at the Forest Hill Steering Group Meeting on 16th December (at Forest Hill Library, 7:00pm).

It would be helpful to know whether anyone with an interest in this subject will be attending.

d
Janey
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 - 02:08 pm:   

Yes, I will aim to be there...if I can get a babysitter!
Anna
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 - 02:12 pm:   

Please can we discuss the development of the Horniman Triangle playground. It's in such a key position and it is as muddy as a rugby pitch at this time of year.
Cllr David Whiting
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 - 02:49 pm:   

Let us try to set up a time for a site visit at the meeting on the 16th.

Janey, we don't have creche arrangements (something we should look at if we are trying to reach the whole community), but I would have no problem with a baby being brought along. Older children might be more difficult at the moment, though I would be happy to deal with playgrounds as the first item if it helped. If you like, email me on Cllr_Dave.whiting@lewisham.gov.uk with contact details.

d
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 - 08:25 pm:   

Would putting a brand new playground within the Horniman grounds be an option? Perhaps in the concrete basin area near the cycle path? The Museum is such an attraction for families from all around and a playground would be an additional bonus. It would also provide a much needed facility for local parents and children. Please could you put this item first on the list for the meeting. I will definitely be there.
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 - 11:07 pm:   

Erm...but the Horniman is private. Nothing to do with the council. (Hence lack of the other normal park features such as dog poop, shaggy lawns, decaying pavillions, teenage delinquents , cottagers, etc). You would be better off dropping them a line and putting it to them.
Susie
Joined N/A
Posted on Friday, 10 December, 2004 - 10:23 am:   

Perhaps they could use some of the 1.5million allocated for the new acquarium.
Al
Joined N/A
Posted on Friday, 10 December, 2004 - 09:17 pm:   

In reply to Hilltop general. I wasn't aware that Dulwich Park was private and it locks it gates at night and, consequently, doesn't have any of the undesirable aspects you cite.
Border Martin
Joined N/A
Posted on Monday, 13 December, 2004 - 10:40 pm:   

Dulwich Park is not private, it is run by Southwark Council, but the park does close at dusk.
P
Joined N/A
Posted on Monday, 13 December, 2004 - 11:06 pm:   

The fact the Horniman closes at dusk is not an argument against it having a playground but actually a good thing in terms of maintenance. The fact it is not council owned may cause problems in terms of council funding for a play area on the site(councillor?) but it is not private in any real sense of the term; it is open to the public and publicly funded. There is an area in the grounds designated a play area (the bare tarmac in the bottom corner)that is crying out for improvement; although the rest of the gardens may look attractive, the question must be at what cost and is this at the expense of necessary facilities? The museum newsletter describes the aquarium being crowded by children and cites this as a cause for redevelopment; could not some of these funds be reallocated so as to provide the facilities that would alleviate this congestion?
Hilltop General
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 09:16 pm:   

Fair point in some ways, but that's not really the Horniman's purpose. I would rather see them allocate their resources to aquariums, etc, in keping with their "mission". The council (or housing developers) should be providing playground facilities and I think there are in fact swings and stuff just opposite on London Road?

I also think we aren't exactly living in a concrete jungle, nor are most of us too deprived, and the need for such things is not so acute here as in some other places.
Ma
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 09:19 pm:   

Whatever play facilities are proposed, they should have some form of canopy as our climate renders many playgrounds useless for much of the time.
Rob
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 09:41 pm:   

Hilltop General, The 'swings and stuff just opposite on London Road' is EXACTLY where Janey's very first posting pointed to - as The Horniman Triangle.

I feel that the essence of Janey's proposal is a calling to get council run facilities improved. A calling that Cllr David Whiting has heard. Bravo!

Kind Regards, Rob
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 10:15 pm:   

I agree with Hilltop General - for once.
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 10:17 pm:   

I think the onus is on the council, not the Horniman to provide playground equipment for kids. And am I missing something here but don't kids run around anymore? There are plenty of green spaces for them to walk and play in. We're not exactly a concrete jungle here in Forest Hill - hence the name.
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 10:19 pm:   

Oh by the way I'm not the same Cathy that posted earlier in case you think I've made a sudden u-turn.
Pete
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 11:14 pm:   

Well, Cathy, you're missing the point that not all kids run around i.e. babies and children with special needs. A well designed play area is a vital and inclusive facility. I don't think anyone was saying the council does not have a responsibility, the issue was more to do with situation. Although there may be superficially green spaces around, the previous comment about our climate indicates, correctly, that they are not appropriate as play areas for large chunks of the year. Bear in mind that we are experiencing an unusually dry autumn and then crawl though the mud of the Horniman Triangle and roll around in the puddles and soggy bark chippings to get a sense of life as a two year old.(See also other threads on underground rivers and burial grounds to get an idea of the underlying geograhy.) Of course this should be an option, well provided for by the fantastic woods nearby, incidentally, but it should not be the only option. The world some people seem to hark back to had one key missing ingredient, cars, and their ability to squash and choke; just because we have not got round to renaming our community Bisected-by-South-Circular-on-the-Hill does not mean we should ignore reality.
Fred
Joined N/A
Posted on Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 - 11:37 pm:   

"The Museum opened in 1901 and was dedicated with the surrounding land as a free gift to the people of London by Frederick Horniman forever for their recreation instruction and enjoyment...
Statutory requirements...(2) the acquisition, provision, establishment and management of public parks for the use and recreation of the public the conservation and preservation of and the creation of public access to their natural features, animal and plant life and the encouragement and promotion of public knowledge and appreciation of the natural world and its development...Performance Targets...Core Target 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 1. Total Number of Visitors 250k 250k 260k 2. Numbers of Children Visitors 100k 100k 110k" (Excerpts from the Horniman website.)
As the Horniman mission and statutory obligations include children and they are expected to provide the entire 10,000 additional visitors on which funding is predicated, why can't they have an instructive and enjoyable outdoor recreational space?
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 01:03 am:   

Pete: how many babies do you see on swings, slides or roundabouts? Otherwise I take your point.

Fred: I think the Horniman caters for children now to the detriment of adults.
It's now impossible to wander around the place without being subject to a wall of noise and children running up and down, while parents stand by and make little attempt to control them. I thought museums were supposed to be places of tranquility and learning for ALL. Isn't that a more democratic approach?
I certainly don't think children's needs are neglected by the Horniman, but I would argue that adults (without kids - yes we do exist) hoping for some peace and quiet contemplation are being overlooked.
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 01:16 am:   

I'm expecting a volley of messages from outraged parents now, but I'm still entitled to an opinion. The community isn't just built around families and their needs although I get the impression many people here think they should be the main priority - to the exclusion of other types of household.
I just get a bit weary of hearing how awful the facilities are for kids. I think it is a great place, and one of the greenest in London - slides or no slides. So... have a go at me if you must but do bear in mind it's not going to change my opinion.
Jack
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 09:50 am:   

Cathy - good point. Forest Hill has facilities for kids. The situation is hardly shocking as has been claimed. To give just a couple of examples, there's a decent park just around the corner from me with a playground, which is often used by families. And Crystal Palace dino-park is a short drive away - that has to be one of the best facilities in London.

Your point about the Horniman is also well made - it's a no go zone at times for those of us who don't find screaming, unruly kids endearing.

Cue a number of 'oh, you haven't got kids, you wouldn't understand' type responses.
Rob
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 12:07 pm:   

Jack,

I don't give a hoot about Cathy's opinion but I soooooooooooo love the '...but do bear in mind it's not going to change my opinion.'

How has 'weary' Cathy found herself where her 'Children's-Playground-Facility-opinions' have solidified that they can't be changed?

I wonder if when she says that her opinion isn't going to change, is she ruling out the possiblity that she might harden to a stronger view?

Cathy, go in peace with your wonderful opinion.

Kind Regards,

Rob
Jack
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 12:42 pm:   

Bit harsh, Rob. She was just stating a (valid, in my opinion) view.
Rob
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 01:04 pm:   

Jack, Sure. Way harsh. Sorry to digress the theme of the thread as it's a niggle of mine when it happens.

And now back to the main topic...
Rob
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 01:06 pm:   

Jack, Sure. Way harsh. Sorry to digress the theme of the thread as it's a niggle of mine when it happens.

And now back to the main topic...
Cathy
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 01:50 pm:   

Thanks Rob for your thoughts.
Luckily I take yours in a kinder spirit than you take mine.
Free speech and all that.
Fred
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 02:14 pm:   

P's comment on the thirteenth referred to the crowding issue in the museum and argued that an outdoor play space would alleviate this; this seems like a sensible argument and should also garner the support of the anti-child lobby. I don't think people are arguing that things are awful, just that they could be improved significantly and quite easily. People who want peace and quiet should try the neglected playgrounds as there are not many children in them.
Cllr David Whiting
Joined N/A
Posted on Wednesday, 15 December, 2004 - 04:01 pm:   

I will be at the library from 7:00pm, and suggest that those interested in playground and related issues get there around then, so we can take this item first.


Local forums in nearby areas: SE13.com | SE14.com | SE20.com | SE22.com | SE24.com | SE25.com | SE27.com