I don't think we should be throwing an more money at projects for 'youths' than we do already. We need to get senior members of the community out and about in a safe environment. Go to any other European country, and they're out there socialising day and night.
Does anyone know who or how the climbing frame in the children's park in Mayo Park burnt down?
No but a good guess would be arson.
Those slide/climbing frame rebuild options:
option 1:
replace with a ladder, coffee shop and potential retail area, the ladder facing central FH (UDP reference 2.4 d). However, no slide, pole or climbing frame might be considered a missed opportunity.
option 2: As above but with some residential blocks helping to frame the new slide. This option actually includes a slide.
option 3: As per 2, but with an exciting new gateway building (10 storey) to the play area. This option also has a rope climbing frame for local residents to hang themselves in frustration.
I like your humour Perryman. Guess they need to replace soonest and try to ensure it is more protected from criminals if at all possible.
I know it was well used and the children must be missing it.
Oh no, that's a real shame. My daughter loves that climbing frame. I am glad that I was warned in advance so that I can tell her before we next go there.
The playgrounds in this area are in serious need of some help!
Mayow Park has been nominated for funding of up to ?400,000 subject to expert panel then public vote:
Lewisham Press Release
23 September 2008
PR547
Lewisham nominating its parks to win a slice of investment funding
Lewisham is putting forward four of its parks to a London-wide public vote, to win funding from the Greater London Authority (GLA).
?6 million has been set aside by the GLA to develop 10 sites across the capital, and all 33 London boroughs are being called on to nominate parks and green spaces, to win a slice of the money.
There are two categories of funding to bid for: a smaller pot of money, of up to ?400,000. The second, much larger pot, could see one park, where major restoration is needed, receiving between ?1 million and ?2 million.
Sir Steve Bullock, Mayor of Lewisham, said: ?Parks and open spaces offer a fantastic opportunity for people to relax and escape the hurley-burley of city life. Lewisham has some fantastic green spaces, and we have the Green Flags to prove it!
?I hope that when it comes to the public vote later in the autumn, the people of Lewisham continue to support our green spaces and vote for their favourite short-listed site in the borough.?
The three sites that Lewisham is nominating for the ?400,000 funding are:
Mayow Park in Forest Hill
Home Park in Sydenham
Deptford Park.
Mountsfield Park in Catford, one of the largest parks in the borough, is being put forward for the larger funding pot of ?1 million - ?2 million.
All London council?s have been asked to submit parks in their borough for the ?Mayor?s Priority Parks? funding. The nominated parks will be short-listed by an expert panel, which will then be put forward for a public vote on the final selection in the autumn. The winning 10 sites will receive a slice of the development funding.
More information about the public vote will appear later in the autumn.
Who can we mail to support Mayow Park.????
Lewisham is putting forward four of its parks...
[/quote]The three sites that Lewisham is nominating...[/quote]
Shame they can't count.
Shame they can't count.
[/quote]Shame Michael can't read 
The three sites that Lewisham is nominating for the ?400,000 funding are:
Mayow Park in Forest Hill
Home Park in Sydenham
Deptford Park.
Mountsfield Park in Catford, one of the largest parks in the borough, is being put forward for the larger funding pot of ?1 million - ?2 million.
Quote:
Shame they can't count.
Shame Michael can't read
Quote:
The three sites that Lewisham is nominating for the ?400,000 funding are:
Mayow Park in Forest Hill
Home Park in Sydenham
Deptford Park.
Mountsfield Park in Catford, one of the largest parks in the borough, is being put forward for the larger funding pot of ?1 million - ?2 million.[/quote]
oops
And to justify my idiocy I first read the press release on
Sydenham Forum where the text ends after the three. But I chose to comment on SE23.com where, as Jon14 points out, the press release is reproduced in full. Much more sensible over here (if you exclude my stupid comments as I know people have learnt to do).
And to justify my idiocy I first read the press release on Sydenham Forum where the text ends after the three. But I chose to comment on SE23.com where, as Jon14 points out, the press release is reproduced in full. Much more sensible over here (if you exclude my stupid comments as I know people have learnt to do).
I'm afraid I can't take the credit for noticing that - it was Spit-fire - I just tried to quote him but I did it wrong and it looks like I just copied what he said.
All I wrote was a smiley face! Your justification was very good though.
What about the Horniman Triangle? Is that Southwark?
Walking in Mayow Park about 1 hour ago and about 8 youths playing soccer on the bowling green. Could not find any officials and could not ring police as unforunately I had forgotten my mobile.
Why do they do it when the rest of the park very quiet and plenty of space to play there
VERY annoying I agree. I guess its the temptation of "doing wrong" but long gone are the days of the "parkie" coming and chasing you out of the park.
However..... that said if people walked their dogs on leads, the kids might be able to play football without the worry of a dog nicking their ball etc.... Big vicious circle.
Yes agree , dog poo all over rest of the grass , does not help and also I admit the kids did not look in the least threatening.
Perhaps a ban on canines would be a start.
Understand there is a meeting on 15th in MP to discoss future of the park.
I shall try to be there.
Two of my elderly neighbours are quite concerned about the state of the bowling green and the reluctance of the council to allow any new buildings or fences to protect the area.
Can one of our counillors advise whether the council want to keep an improved bowling green
I have heard that when The Mayow Family bequested the area for a park it was on the understanding that they always retained a bowling green. Is this correct pleass , does anyone know.
This is a very important facility for a number of elderly people.