1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Children from social housing not allowed on playground

Discussion in 'Personal' started by bobpite, Mar 26, 2019.

  1. towncryer

    towncryer Lead commenter

    Yes it is and I pity all the residents involved whether they be social or private. My personal experience with management companies and local councils is that neither will want to make the next move...particularly as the council has effectively washed their hands of it,
  2. magic surf bus

    magic surf bus Star commenter

    As kids we used to get told off by residents for crossing a private road using a public footpath. Consequently you didn't play near the private road. I was driving somewhere recently and saw a sign to the effect that the open green space in front of the houses was only for residents as it was privately maintained. Some of the squares in central London are residents only too, aren't they? Kingston Hill as I recall in the 80s was effectively a private estate, with barriers at the entrances.

    If they're that keen on social segregation they should have a pass card system on the gate, but anything involving word of mouth seems silly.
  3. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    I am guilty too. No children are allowed to come and play in my garden.
  4. TCSC47

    TCSC47 Star commenter

    To me, this is part of the unacceptable face of capitalism, I see this as the same thing as gated communities, private health care, public schooling, private security personnel. Because somebody has the money, they can isolate themselves from aspects of the rest of society. The trouble is that they then don't see why they should pay tax to run society as they don't need the same protections and resources the rest of us do and as we are seeing from the likes of Ress-Moggy, (not trying to bring this back to Brexit but to use him as an example of the monied) spend their whole time trying to undermine what the rest of us need for their own benifit,

    My point is that they are taking advantage of the rest of us. The still need much of the trappings of society but are able to cherry pick the bits they want. Society is society and we should all be paying our fair share.
    monicabilongame likes this.
  5. towncryer

    towncryer Lead commenter

    Well don't we all cherry pick in one way or another where we can? Who hasn't chosen to live in a "nice"neighborhood or a good catchment area. How many on here have just plumped for the first house available no matter where it is? If you didn't then you have cherry picked. Who has paid for laser eye surgery for instance or private dental surgery not available on the NHS because they can? Are we all driving around in the oldest,most serviceable and economic car we can find? Even better are we using public transport?
    There are different levels of cherry picking obviously but my guess is that most of us do it in one way or another,
    What bothers me is when msm pick up on something like this and bend the story to their own ends.
    China tried making life more equal for everyone....it didn't end well.
    agathamorse and Oscillatingass like this.
  6. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    Its not just London where such things happen!
    agathamorse and towncryer like this.
  7. InkyP

    InkyP Star commenter

    I think it's a question of access, they can't get through. I suppose if they were invited by one of the rich kids they could go in but it would still put them in an inferior position.
  8. Stiltskin

    Stiltskin Star commenter

    It seems Henley Homes sold the freehold to the social housing to the Guinness Partnership which apparently required the properties to have to have a boundary in order for the freeholds to be seperate. So it's due to profit making by the developer it happened.

    On the plus side there's a really nice big park and playground on the opposite side to the road with a farm (I used to teach in the Primary school around the corner, which has a playground including a 5 a side pitch on the roof = playground duty was interesting!)
    agathamorse likes this.
  9. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Doesn't everybody? How much drug dealing and crime is there in your block?
    agathamorse and towncryer like this.
  10. towncryer

    towncryer Lead commenter

    No more so than a kid who lives in a terraced house being invited to a party at his classmate's 4 bed detached.
  11. towncryer

    towncryer Lead commenter

    So storm in a tea cup really. They can all go to the park and play nice..which ever end of the housing spectrum they are on.
    agathamorse likes this.
  12. towncryer

    towncryer Lead commenter

    '"Jeremy Corbyn, James Brokenshire and Sadiq Khan criticise Henley Homes for excluding social housing residents from playground"' (Guardian headline)

    I wonder when was the last time any of these opened up their gardens to all and sundry. Lead by example!
  13. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

    If it's a communal garden, that's not the same as anyone's own personal garden.
  14. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    But still not a public garden.
  15. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

    The question is whether on the same development there should be some sort of social apartheid where residents who have bought a property can use one lot of gardens, and those who rent can't.
    monicabilongame, corgie11 and jubilee like this.
  16. florian gassmann

    florian gassmann Star commenter

    But Henley Homes claims that it is not the same development. Henley Homes said the development was "in fact two neighbouring estates" with Warwick Estates managing the private part and Guinness Partnership the social housing side.

    It is now up to Lambeth Council to enforce planning laws, if they have been broken.
  17. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter

    Well they would, wouldn't they? ;)

    I've seen the plan in the paper*. It's the same development.

    * Click on this! Untitled1.jpg
    monicabilongame likes this.
  18. smoothnewt

    smoothnewt Star commenter

  19. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    No-one is needed to police the system. The social housing is in one wing of the development, probably with an entrance on a different street. The garden areas are sectioned off from each other, with no gate connection. Only social tenants can access the small play area. Only private residents can access the larger play area.
    Do I see a double row of metal mesh fencing to the side of the social tenants' play space? Is that designed for future guard patrols or guard dog patrols?
  20. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    I've now look at satellite images on a property website. The social playground is so much smaller than the private one. It is placed between the social wing of the development and some football pitches that look to be totally fenced off from the development. Great, you might say. They have a scenic view from the small play area. Then you see the double metal fence with greennery growing between. I guess that eventually the bushes will be high enough to screen the sports' areas from the social play area, further throwing it into literal shade.

    Very few parents in the social housing will have sight of their children playing in the small area. The L-shaped private play area is grassed, has a tyre rope swing amongst other amenities and seems to be overlooked from all the private balconies as well as from some of the social housing balconies. Some children will simply be able to watch from their flat as other children, who live in an adjoining wing of the same school conversion, have fun in a large, attractive space that they cannot access. How does a child make sense of that? Talk about fomenting social discord!

    Remember also that the original plans were for two play areas, with a gate allowing access from the grassed one to the all-weather one. Presumably it was not submitted as a either play area being designated for only one type of resident.
    chelsea2 likes this.

Share This Page