Loughborough Junction Masterplan (presentation 14/17 September)
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Thanks. In hindsight I have mixed feelings about it. It could give the Council more time to soften people up to accept loss of the Adventure Playground. Will have to see what the Council make of it.
The officers and Cllrs had a mixed reception to the idea from there body language.
The Masterplan is for general guidance and I thought that putting such a definitive proposal in the Masterplan is not necessary. That land could be for youth provision without putting in this proposal for example.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
It was a good meeting as a lot of people present , including you, put in a lot of really good comments.
I think the Council thought people would go off on one and just rant. But they didn’t.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
For example one person put forward idea of social value. The Council officers had been going on about how to gain maximum value from there assets in monetary terms.
But they had not looked at gains and losses including social value. That is does the monetary gain from selling off the playground balance out with the long term loss of a socially valuable space for children.
Its a very interesting idea.
The Council is under a great deal of pressure but imo just looking at short term monetary value is falling into the trap of facilitating the capitalist market.
But they had not looked at gains and losses including social value. That is does the monetary gain from selling off the playground balance out with the long term loss of a socially valuable space for children.
Its a very interesting idea.
The Council is under a great deal of pressure but imo just looking at short term monetary value is falling into the trap of facilitating the capitalist market.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I'm not sure it's an "interesting idea" - it's stating the obvious. If only social and monetary value were interchangeable in terms of actually being a viable solution to a lack of money. Maybe the council can start paying its contractors and employees in "social value credits" instead of cash?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Put this on the LJ chatter thread put should also go here:
Cllr Jack Hopkins response to LJ Neighbourhood Planning Forum letter to Cllr Lib Peck on masterplan.
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/c678366a8fc275dc2daf27f88/files/LJAGCllrJackHopkinsletter29.11.2016.
pdf
Minutes of the meeting where Masterplan was discussed:
Minutes of the meeting of 7 November
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/c678366a8fc275dc2daf27f88/files/LJAGminutes07.11.2016.pdf
Cllr Jack Hopkins response to LJ Neighbourhood Planning Forum letter to Cllr Lib Peck on masterplan.
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/c678366a8fc275dc2daf27f88/files/LJAGCllrJackHopkinsletter29.11.2016.
Minutes of the meeting where Masterplan was discussed:
Minutes of the meeting of 7 November
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/c678366a8fc275dc2daf27f88/files/LJAGminutes07.11.2016.pdf
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I went to the meeting last week of the LJ Neighbourhood Planning Forum.
There was a Ward Cllr and officer present, not as big a turnout as at last meeting.
The letter from Cllr Hopkins was discussed.
A few points that came up.
So it looks to me that the idea of getting rid of Adventure playground , new Youth centre by deal with a developer ( with no affordable housing) was the Council idea from the start. No one from community was lobbying the Council for this. The Youth Centre building is fine. At recent meetings imo the Council has failed to put a coherent case why the Youth Centre needs rebuilding. If its all about money why do this?
In reality locals were not really going to get a say in it.
But the Council will use the consultation findings to support this plan.
I did ask to make sure that the opposition from LJAG, Brixton Society and the LJN planning forum are recorded. Council say they will. Also had comment from Cllr that these are just from particular groups. So its back to the old idea that if a group opposes the Council its no longer representative. (Heard at meeting the the Council leader was not at all happy with LJAGs letter).
There was a Ward Cllr and officer present, not as big a turnout as at last meeting.
The letter from Cllr Hopkins was discussed.
A few points that came up.
- The review of the Local Plan will start soon. Consultation has not started yet. This is above the masterplan in order of importance. So people need to make comments on it re LJ.
- LJ as a "Town Centre" or "(Large) Local Centre. The Council see LJ as large local centre. This came up from people of the Estate who have always resisted LJAGs idea of making LJ a "destination" ie not a town centre.
- Whether in the future to go for a Neighbourhood Plan or use the Councils scheme to replace Section 106 "CLIPS". This is for local community to decide. No agreement on this at the moment.
- The Marcus Lipton Youth Centre/ Adventure Playground site. Acrimonious discussion ensued. The Council, in Hopkins letter, are saying idea of Elam Space partly being used for Adventure playground new site was incorrectly reported. Pointed out by me that this was not what I was asking about. That the issue was that difference of opinion on how Adventure playground views were reported. Council argue that people supported idea of improved Youth Centre. That the only way to fund this was to do a deal with a developer therefore losing the adventure playground. After some argument Cllr said that its time to move on and not argue about the consultation any more. It was asked what was wrong with the Youth Centre building. No proper answer to this again( bimble asked the same at last meeting). If the Youth Centre building is structurally ok why demolish it? Also was asked if a developer was given part of the site to build on in return for new youth centre would this likely mean that the new housing would contain no affordable housing? Council reply :This is likely to happen. Raised that the new housing in LJ is not really affordable for many people. Discussion on provision of Adventure playgrounds. Council looking at Dexter, Max Roach as nearby alternatives to LJ one. Someone from Estate pointed out that parents from the estate had used the LJ Adventure playground. Council asked about idea to take this contentious plan for site out of the masterplan. Council still discussing this. Looks likely to be no. Cllr said that if there was no definite plan for this site other section of the Council might try to sell of the land anyway as an asset sale. So if locals did not support this proposal they would be sorry.
So it looks to me that the idea of getting rid of Adventure playground , new Youth centre by deal with a developer ( with no affordable housing) was the Council idea from the start. No one from community was lobbying the Council for this. The Youth Centre building is fine. At recent meetings imo the Council has failed to put a coherent case why the Youth Centre needs rebuilding. If its all about money why do this?
In reality locals were not really going to get a say in it.
But the Council will use the consultation findings to support this plan.
I did ask to make sure that the opposition from LJAG, Brixton Society and the LJN planning forum are recorded. Council say they will. Also had comment from Cllr that these are just from particular groups. So its back to the old idea that if a group opposes the Council its no longer representative. (Heard at meeting the the Council leader was not at all happy with LJAGs letter).
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Went to the LJ Neighbourhood Planning Forum last night.
The Adventure Playground.
Over Christmas I met an architect who had worked on Dexter. After chatting to him met him a few weeks ago with LJAG member.
He came up with alternative suggestions for the site that overcome some of the problems the Council raise. It's possible to design an adventure playground that is low maintenance and does not need staff. We also discussed outdoor gym. Activities for older children and young adults. Along with that some family housing to overlook the site. Which makes sense if it is not staffed.
So ideas that could lead to an alternative plan that deals with the problems the Council has with funding staffing on regular basis.
I brought this up at the forum. Cllr was interested to know more. The officer was not keen.
I asked for clarification that ,as far as the Master plan is concerned, the future of this site is shelved, pending further discussion. I wanted to know that the officers would not go ahead and finish the Masterplan with there plan for private flats and no adventure playground in it.
After asking several times the only answer I got was that at the moment officers were to busy on other projects to finish the Masterplan.
Not satisfactory IMO. Officer said that was the only answer she was prepared to give.
Someone from LJAG asked about Play London who had approached the Council to run the Adventure Playground. Why were they rebuffed by Council?
Answer from officer was that the Council wanted works to be done to get the AP up to standard. That they told Play London to come back when they had the money.
After meeting chat people felt the Council officers don't want the APG used. They want it to run down.
Another thing that came up was the public meeting on the playground. No date set yet. It will now over all four APGs in Coldharbour Ward.
bimble
The Adventure Playground.
Over Christmas I met an architect who had worked on Dexter. After chatting to him met him a few weeks ago with LJAG member.
He came up with alternative suggestions for the site that overcome some of the problems the Council raise. It's possible to design an adventure playground that is low maintenance and does not need staff. We also discussed outdoor gym. Activities for older children and young adults. Along with that some family housing to overlook the site. Which makes sense if it is not staffed.
So ideas that could lead to an alternative plan that deals with the problems the Council has with funding staffing on regular basis.
I brought this up at the forum. Cllr was interested to know more. The officer was not keen.
I asked for clarification that ,as far as the Master plan is concerned, the future of this site is shelved, pending further discussion. I wanted to know that the officers would not go ahead and finish the Masterplan with there plan for private flats and no adventure playground in it.
After asking several times the only answer I got was that at the moment officers were to busy on other projects to finish the Masterplan.
Not satisfactory IMO. Officer said that was the only answer she was prepared to give.
Someone from LJAG asked about Play London who had approached the Council to run the Adventure Playground. Why were they rebuffed by Council?
Answer from officer was that the Council wanted works to be done to get the AP up to standard. That they told Play London to come back when they had the money.
After meeting chat people felt the Council officers don't want the APG used. They want it to run down.
Another thing that came up was the public meeting on the playground. No date set yet. It will now over all four APGs in Coldharbour Ward.
bimble
bimble
floofy
Thanks Gramsci.
Was Matt Parr there?
I received an email from Anthea of LJAG on 12th Jan, she said :
"Cllr Matt Parr has promised to call a public meeting about plans to close the Grove Adventure Playground but I haven't heard from him. "
I've just asked Anthea if there is any news.
Can you help me with a website / contact for 'Play London' please? Google unsurpisingly no use.
I would like to help and I work in fundraising.
Was Matt Parr there?
I received an email from Anthea of LJAG on 12th Jan, she said :
"Cllr Matt Parr has promised to call a public meeting about plans to close the Grove Adventure Playground but I haven't heard from him. "
I've just asked Anthea if there is any news.
Can you help me with a website / contact for 'Play London' please? Google unsurpisingly no use.
I would like to help and I work in fundraising.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Childrens play in London | adventure playgrounds | play consulting - London Play
Cllr Matt Parr was at the meeting. He was much more interested in ideas for the site than the officer.
Worth emailing Anthea to say you would like to help with fundraising. That may be great help.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Cllr Matt Parr said at meeting that the other three APGs the Council is seeking other providers to run them. That the Council does not want to see them closed. It's that the Council cannot fund them.
As someone said to me the Council is is actively seeking to reopen the other APGs but when it comes to LJ the officers are not. They could for example support London Play in seeking funding. It's doing this with the LJ Works / Farm project.
As someone said to me the Council is is actively seeking to reopen the other APGs but when it comes to LJ the officers are not. They could for example support London Play in seeking funding. It's doing this with the LJ Works / Farm project.
bimble
floofy
Gramsci Anthea has written back regarding Adventure Playground as follows:
"Matt wants to hold the meeting on 24 February - still to be confirmed - during the day so parents can come - I think this means late afternoon around 4pm. I am going to try and hold the meeting at the adventure playground.
Planned participants are: Cllr Matt Parr and Cllr Jane Pickard - the cabinet member in charge of APG - London Play - an organisation which promotes children's play and who recently tried to get involved in running Grove but were turned down by Lambeth because they don't have any funding - and a successful example of someone running a successful playground in the current financial climate and possibly Ashvin from Variant Architects who have some ideas about how to make the site work.
As soon as I have agreed words and format for poster/leaflet I will get it designed and printed and then we will need some help delivering.
So some progress."
I'll get in touch with London Play today regarding help with fundraising. Optimism is hard to come by at the moment but this is definitely worth fighting for.
"Matt wants to hold the meeting on 24 February - still to be confirmed - during the day so parents can come - I think this means late afternoon around 4pm. I am going to try and hold the meeting at the adventure playground.
Planned participants are: Cllr Matt Parr and Cllr Jane Pickard - the cabinet member in charge of APG - London Play - an organisation which promotes children's play and who recently tried to get involved in running Grove but were turned down by Lambeth because they don't have any funding - and a successful example of someone running a successful playground in the current financial climate and possibly Ashvin from Variant Architects who have some ideas about how to make the site work.
As soon as I have agreed words and format for poster/leaflet I will get it designed and printed and then we will need some help delivering.
So some progress."
I'll get in touch with London Play today regarding help with fundraising. Optimism is hard to come by at the moment but this is definitely worth fighting for.
bimble
floofy
wow.
1) we're doing this because you said its what you wanted.
2) nobody has complained
3) Any re-opening of the playground would need to have very serious funding commitment, and include significant refurbishment of the entire site, even though it was judged fit for purpose a few months ago.
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Expressions of concern have been made by LJAG and Brixton Society.
The previous round of consultation that I attended presented the officers option as the only one. So the proposal by officers was not a direct result of the consultation.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Wording of the leaflet above is a compromise. From what I gather Council insisted on this.
If people cannot make it then they can email Cllr on the leaflet to express view.
It's in daytime so that parents can attend. Not sure how well that will work.
The best outcome will be for Council to agree to let an organisation like London Play run the APG. Also for it to be taken off the masterplan.
bimble
If people cannot make it then they can email Cllr on the leaflet to express view.
It's in daytime so that parents can attend. Not sure how well that will work.
The best outcome will be for Council to agree to let an organisation like London Play run the APG. Also for it to be taken off the masterplan.
bimble
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Meeting about Grove Adventure Playground 3rd March
Cllr Matt Parr, Cllr Pickard and Helen Hayes attended.
Cllr Matt Parr started the meeting with purpose of the meeting and background.
The meeting was to see if there is a desire in the area for an APG and viable suggestions to reopen it.
Coldharbour Ward has a high level of deprivation. A young age profile. Large number out of work. Average income is low. So struggle to afford childcare. Has gang problems.
Cllr Pickard- Council has budget cuts from central Government. Youth services are high on agenda. Three ways to keep Youth services with less funding.
Preserve Youth services by transferring to community groups and charities. They can get funding from grants.
Youth Lambeth Co-op set up. Council involve young people. The Youth Co-op is independent of the Council. Council is funding them to put money into early intervention services.
APGs- involve voluntary sector. Eight APGs are run by voluntary sector. Another eight were run by Lambeth. Council has been transferring these to voluntary sector. Council has gradually been reducing funding to APGs.
Grove APG was not Council run. 18 months ago Cllr Pickard visited the APG to see what was happening. Then place closed down by the group that ran it. She said the Council had difficulty in contacting the people who ran Grove APG.
The Masterplanning process was to look at what to do in area for Youth provision.
The Council has no money to invest in it.
Dexter , Max Roach and Loughborough APGs. Cllr Pickard said Dexter and Max Roach were run by the Council. Loughborough was run by Kids Company which folded. The Council has been trying to get other providers to run these three APGs.
Through the Lambeth Young peoples Co-op/ Youth Council a procurement exercise has been finished. Results not public yet. One or two should reopen.
Cllr Pickard asked what kind of provision for young people was needed in LJ. What age group and where.
Meeting then had people from area give views.
Anthea (LJAG). The Grove APG is a beautiful site with a special character. There is a need for a supervised play area. Families in area do not allow there children to play on the streets as it's not safe. The community needs to be given a chance to run it.
Elkin - life long resident.
The APG is important for the community. It's an area of high deprivation. With gang problems and postcode wars.
Building extra flats on site and losing the APG leads to lack of infrastructure to support the increased population.
Devon Thomas
Devon was involved in setting up the original APG in the area. In early days the APG had 8 full time workers. Gradually over the years resources were reduced. This led to the capacity of the local community to mobilise to lessen.
This facility is needed. This is a community asset. Once it's lost its gone for good. The Council shouldn't listen to developers.
At this point Helen Hayes MP had to leave. She said a case for the facility was very clear.
Local Parent
She said facility was needed. Area is being gentrified. Engage the new people coming in to use there skills to support this facility. Said there is little mixing between the people of different income groups. As a Canadian who now lives here she has been struck by the class divide here.
So a broader creative approach with wider involvement as response to no Council funding would help. Using a social enterprise model.
The land should not be sold to developer.
Jake
Has small business in LJ. Also comes from Deptford. More and more children are trapped in homes. They do not have a relationship with open space. A social enterprise can do enterprise and training.
Marcus Lipton Director
Nothing this side of Coldharbour Ward for play. Parents will not allow children to go to Max Roach or Dexter due to issues around postcodes.
Losing the Grove APG will lead to loss of transition of early years to teenagers. The youth centre caters for teenagers. It's good to have both facilities next to each other.
Big Locker
Big Locker ( not sure if this is right. Some kind of community group.)
Community Assets should be kept. Social Landlords have a role to play.
Next Council Officer gave there proposal for site.
Chronic need for housing. The APG play services poorly used. The Youth centre has ongoing maintenance costs for Council.
So new Youth Centre with housing to pay for it.
Then officer said something about the Council setting up an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) which would build the housing and rent it. He did say this would include affordable housing.
(This is new. At all previous discussions the Council said they would do a deal with developer. I was unable to question officer more on this.)
Next there were contributions from people with experience of APGs.
Lollard street
Lollard Street APG is run by local community. Council funding now gone. Fund raising is a full time job. Make income also from renting out facilities. A long lease is needed to get grants. 15 -20 years.
Cllr Pickard said this is a successful model. But officers are not keen on giving long leases.
Lollard Street person said even though an APG has been closed for a while if it's reopened people will use it. That was there experience.
London Play
London Play campaign for children's play spaces.
Traditionally APGs were free. There is only so much volunteers can do. They should be child led. Giving children opportunity to play outside. If combined with Youth centre this outside play area would be lost.
The funding of Sixties and Seventies is long gone. APGs need to diversify. Such as training programmes for school staff, play therapy and renting out for corporate awaydays.
Empirical research shows the positive outcomes of APGs.
Emotional Well-being
Improved confidence
Communities coming together
Helps parents in other ways.
Volunteering
Engage with nature
APGs can do after school work clubs. GPs can refer people to them.
Children should be involved in the design and build. Which also means they can learn skills.
Funding can be obtained from companies who want to fulfil there CSR Corporate Social Responsibility.
Ashvin of Variant architects.
Ashvin has worked on many play projects. Including Dexter APG. The last Labour government Play Pathfinder programme meant that many APGs were designed and built. He is parent and local architect. Has worked with Council. So has insider experience.
Said the Council has innovative project developing in LJ Works ( the farm site).
A few of his points.
If there is to some new housing provision the kind needs to be looked at closely. Needs family oriented housing. Flats are not the answer.
It's cheaper in long run to refurbish rather than rebuild.
Possibly rethink idea of APG. Have interactional open space.
Engage with children who will use the facility in the design
Reduce costs by designing it so it can also be unmanned space.
Design so can be used by different age groups at different times of day. Young people's play in day adult gym at night. Makes it more sustainable.
If open space common complaint is that it may be taken over by older youths. Engage with them and provide them with activity. Example given is table tennis on site.
The redline should be to not lose this space.
After this what are next steps?
Comments
Various people said the meeting was at a bad time (1pm on Friday).
Town hall style meeting does not suit everyone. Use social media.
Young people need to be involved.
Those present who were interested in being involved in developing future for the site were asked to give there contact details.
Anthea of LJAG will do an email newsletter to ask people if they are interested in being on a working group.
Cllr Matt Parr, Cllr Pickard and Helen Hayes attended.
Cllr Matt Parr started the meeting with purpose of the meeting and background.
The meeting was to see if there is a desire in the area for an APG and viable suggestions to reopen it.
Coldharbour Ward has a high level of deprivation. A young age profile. Large number out of work. Average income is low. So struggle to afford childcare. Has gang problems.
Cllr Pickard- Council has budget cuts from central Government. Youth services are high on agenda. Three ways to keep Youth services with less funding.
Preserve Youth services by transferring to community groups and charities. They can get funding from grants.
Youth Lambeth Co-op set up. Council involve young people. The Youth Co-op is independent of the Council. Council is funding them to put money into early intervention services.
APGs- involve voluntary sector. Eight APGs are run by voluntary sector. Another eight were run by Lambeth. Council has been transferring these to voluntary sector. Council has gradually been reducing funding to APGs.
Grove APG was not Council run. 18 months ago Cllr Pickard visited the APG to see what was happening. Then place closed down by the group that ran it. She said the Council had difficulty in contacting the people who ran Grove APG.
The Masterplanning process was to look at what to do in area for Youth provision.
The Council has no money to invest in it.
Dexter , Max Roach and Loughborough APGs. Cllr Pickard said Dexter and Max Roach were run by the Council. Loughborough was run by Kids Company which folded. The Council has been trying to get other providers to run these three APGs.
Through the Lambeth Young peoples Co-op/ Youth Council a procurement exercise has been finished. Results not public yet. One or two should reopen.
Cllr Pickard asked what kind of provision for young people was needed in LJ. What age group and where.
Meeting then had people from area give views.
Anthea (LJAG). The Grove APG is a beautiful site with a special character. There is a need for a supervised play area. Families in area do not allow there children to play on the streets as it's not safe. The community needs to be given a chance to run it.
Elkin - life long resident.
The APG is important for the community. It's an area of high deprivation. With gang problems and postcode wars.
Building extra flats on site and losing the APG leads to lack of infrastructure to support the increased population.
Devon Thomas
Devon was involved in setting up the original APG in the area. In early days the APG had 8 full time workers. Gradually over the years resources were reduced. This led to the capacity of the local community to mobilise to lessen.
This facility is needed. This is a community asset. Once it's lost its gone for good. The Council shouldn't listen to developers.
At this point Helen Hayes MP had to leave. She said a case for the facility was very clear.
Local Parent
She said facility was needed. Area is being gentrified. Engage the new people coming in to use there skills to support this facility. Said there is little mixing between the people of different income groups. As a Canadian who now lives here she has been struck by the class divide here.
So a broader creative approach with wider involvement as response to no Council funding would help. Using a social enterprise model.
The land should not be sold to developer.
Jake
Has small business in LJ. Also comes from Deptford. More and more children are trapped in homes. They do not have a relationship with open space. A social enterprise can do enterprise and training.
Marcus Lipton Director
Nothing this side of Coldharbour Ward for play. Parents will not allow children to go to Max Roach or Dexter due to issues around postcodes.
Losing the Grove APG will lead to loss of transition of early years to teenagers. The youth centre caters for teenagers. It's good to have both facilities next to each other.
Big Locker
Big Locker ( not sure if this is right. Some kind of community group.)
Community Assets should be kept. Social Landlords have a role to play.
Next Council Officer gave there proposal for site.
Chronic need for housing. The APG play services poorly used. The Youth centre has ongoing maintenance costs for Council.
So new Youth Centre with housing to pay for it.
Then officer said something about the Council setting up an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) which would build the housing and rent it. He did say this would include affordable housing.
(This is new. At all previous discussions the Council said they would do a deal with developer. I was unable to question officer more on this.)
Next there were contributions from people with experience of APGs.
Lollard street
Lollard Street APG is run by local community. Council funding now gone. Fund raising is a full time job. Make income also from renting out facilities. A long lease is needed to get grants. 15 -20 years.
Cllr Pickard said this is a successful model. But officers are not keen on giving long leases.
Lollard Street person said even though an APG has been closed for a while if it's reopened people will use it. That was there experience.
London Play
London Play campaign for children's play spaces.
Traditionally APGs were free. There is only so much volunteers can do. They should be child led. Giving children opportunity to play outside. If combined with Youth centre this outside play area would be lost.
The funding of Sixties and Seventies is long gone. APGs need to diversify. Such as training programmes for school staff, play therapy and renting out for corporate awaydays.
Empirical research shows the positive outcomes of APGs.
Emotional Well-being
Improved confidence
Communities coming together
Helps parents in other ways.
Volunteering
Engage with nature
APGs can do after school work clubs. GPs can refer people to them.
Children should be involved in the design and build. Which also means they can learn skills.
Funding can be obtained from companies who want to fulfil there CSR Corporate Social Responsibility.
Ashvin of Variant architects.
Ashvin has worked on many play projects. Including Dexter APG. The last Labour government Play Pathfinder programme meant that many APGs were designed and built. He is parent and local architect. Has worked with Council. So has insider experience.
Said the Council has innovative project developing in LJ Works ( the farm site).
A few of his points.
If there is to some new housing provision the kind needs to be looked at closely. Needs family oriented housing. Flats are not the answer.
It's cheaper in long run to refurbish rather than rebuild.
Possibly rethink idea of APG. Have interactional open space.
Engage with children who will use the facility in the design
Reduce costs by designing it so it can also be unmanned space.
Design so can be used by different age groups at different times of day. Young people's play in day adult gym at night. Makes it more sustainable.
If open space common complaint is that it may be taken over by older youths. Engage with them and provide them with activity. Example given is table tennis on site.
The redline should be to not lose this space.
After this what are next steps?
Comments
Various people said the meeting was at a bad time (1pm on Friday).
Town hall style meeting does not suit everyone. Use social media.
Young people need to be involved.
Those present who were interested in being involved in developing future for the site were asked to give there contact details.
Anthea of LJAG will do an email newsletter to ask people if they are interested in being on a working group.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Thanks for putting these notes up. I had to do a visit outside London, so couldn't have gone to the meting. These very full notes are very helpful.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Got this follow up seeking those who might be interested in being on a working group to develop a plan to keep the Grove APG:
Grove Adventure Playground - the next step
Grove Adventure Playground
the next steps
Thank you so much for coming to the meeting on Friday about the future of the Grove Adventure Playground.
LJAG is pleased that so many people are keen to explore if there is a way of reopening and getting this valuable community facility up and running again.
I was asked to email everyone to find out what skills people have to offer and the times people are available for meetings.
Everyone's contribution towards this campaign is welcome but it would be useful to know if anyone as any of the following skills to offer:
- communications
- building skills/DIY skills
- youth work
- fundraising
- administration
- volunteering time
also
what times you are available:
- weekdays - am or pm or evenings
- Saturdays - am or pm or evenings
- Sundays - am or pm or evenings
Please email us at ljactiongroup@gmail.com and we will organise another meeting at some point over the next couple of weeks so as not to loose the momentum.
I look forward to working with you all.
Best wishes
Anthea Masey
Chair
Loughborough Junction Action Group
Grove Adventure Playground - the next step
Grove Adventure Playground
the next steps
Thank you so much for coming to the meeting on Friday about the future of the Grove Adventure Playground.
LJAG is pleased that so many people are keen to explore if there is a way of reopening and getting this valuable community facility up and running again.
I was asked to email everyone to find out what skills people have to offer and the times people are available for meetings.
Everyone's contribution towards this campaign is welcome but it would be useful to know if anyone as any of the following skills to offer:
- communications
- building skills/DIY skills
- youth work
- fundraising
- administration
- volunteering time
also
what times you are available:
- weekdays - am or pm or evenings
- Saturdays - am or pm or evenings
- Sundays - am or pm or evenings
Please email us at ljactiongroup@gmail.com and we will organise another meeting at some point over the next couple of weeks so as not to loose the momentum.
I look forward to working with you all.
Best wishes
Anthea Masey
Chair
Loughborough Junction Action Group
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Meeting next week to discuss next steps to save Grove APG
Save the Grove Adventure Playground - the next steps
Save the Grove Adventure Playground - the next steps
Similar threads
