James Barber

I've attached the sub-committees decision. Hours: Reduced to 23.30 serving alcohol Friday and Saturdays and closed by midnight. Conditions: ? The 4 conditions proposed by Trading Standards and listed on page 23 of the agenda are to be added to the licence in full. Police conditions listed below are to be added to the licence: ? The personal licence holder must be on the premises at all times that intoxicating liquor is being provided. ? That a CCTV system is installed at the premises and be maintained in good working order and be continually recording at all times the premises are in used under the licence. The CCTV system must be capable of capturing an image of every person who enters the premises. ? That all CCTV footage shall be kept for a period of 31 days and shall, upon request, be made available immediately to officers of the Police and the council. ? Condition 303 is replaced with the following conditions: o When the premises is used for an event promoted either internally by the premises or by an external promoter, where it is advertised in the press and on websites and where people pre-purchase a ticket or pay at the door, the organiser must complete a Promotion/Event Assessment Form (MP696) supplied by the Police and ensure that a copy of that and the agreement is provided to the Police and Licensing Unit a minimum of 14 days prior to the date of hire. This requirement does not apply to events directly associated with a registered charity. o When events as described above take place at least 2 SIA registered door staff should be employed at all times from 21:00 to the terminal hour the premises is being used. They shall be provided with hand-held metal detectors and ensure that searches are carried out in respect of all admissions including members of the public, performers and their assistants and the door-staff will also be provided with a mechanical counting device to ensure the accommodation limit is not exceeded. o You shall notify the Police and the Licensing Unit on all other occasions when the premises is hired out to any third party at least 7 days prior to the date of the event. ? If requested by the Police and Licensing Unit a Promotion/Event Assessment Form will be submitted and security staff be employed as above. ? The DPS and premises management will hold meetings with the Police and Licensing Unit to discuss operational issues as and when requested.

I met with council officers about this scheme yesterday. They've since confirmed that of the 12 reported collissions on Grove Vale in the last 3 years, 3 considered to involve speed as a contributory factor - one being the fatality when the car hit the kerb and flipped. The most expensive parts of this scheme are the raised treatments to slow vehicles down. I'm still unconvinced that the annual traffic flow of Grove Vale being inconvenienced by negotiating the proposed raised roads outweighs on average part of the contribution to one crash every year. The fataliaty was such extreme driving that I really don't think its representative. I say this taking into account the extra convenience of people crossing Grove Vale and how it would make such crossing easier for me but equally make cycling and beign a bus passenger much less comfortable. So again on balance I'd prefer the proposed raised road didn't happen and the money be used to make others parts of Southwark safer.

Hi skyblue, My perspective. It seems at best bizarre that some secondary schools in Southwark are taking Lewisham kids who are travelling past Southwark kids who've not been allocated places in Southwark secondary schools. Yet at the same time Southwark kids are being offered the places Lewisham kids didn't want in Lewisham. Charter School catchment criteria appears doctored by not accepting the pedestrian cut throughs of Wanley Road or Greendale to Blanchedowne. Kingsdale criteria works against some extremely local kids. These schools are now so well accepted that I would hope they could open up more to local kids. Which is why my eard colleagues Cllr Jonathan Mitchell, Rosie Shimell and myself have arranged a visit to the Harris East Dulwich Boys Academy and are in the throse of arranging a visit to Kingsdale.

I've had a very quick response that the works were a mistake and were halted as soon as it was realised. Assured this wont be repeated and await a report about how much work was done and why. The manager concerned I have confidence will get the bottom of it and will ensure the same mistake is not repeated.

Hi Penguin68, Lots of dicsussion around the junction of Underhill Road with Barry Road and the collissions has taken place on another thread. Hi trentk69, I had taken up some casework about potholes on Barry Road. Im not if that or another issue meant these works took place but not telling people and removing machinery in the very early hours afterwards is at best inconsiderate. Would people prefer to have had the works take place on a Saturday rather than very late evening?

I reported the problem yesterday and checked this morning and still the junction timings appear incorrect. Some vehicles chsoe to ignore the lights and this is a recipe for an avoidable collission. I'll chase this again now.

I was horrified to hear this. In East Dulwich the East Dulwich councillors have allocated a lot of our annual Cleaner, Greener, Safer capital funds to planting more trees on East Dulwich streets - we certainly wouldn't expect street trees to be 'savaged' and certainly not at the wrong time of the year. I've contacted the head of parks that includes the tree management department. When I received her response I'll post it here.

or been involved in the Lacon incident.

Hi candp, Slightly out of my patch but happy to report it and ask to see the paper copy of the traffic light sequence. NB.I've been asking for all traffic light sequences to be made publicly available as we must have loads of traffic engineers and others who could finesse the current settings and squeeze more pedestrian time out of them. Whenever I give a specific example of a daft set of settings they get improved but never get whole set of traffic light sequences. This is a slow way ot improve things.

Hi civilservant, The extra crossing outside COop/Somerfield is meant to have happened this financial year! We will eventually get it. We'll also get one on Lordship Lane at the junction of East Dulwich Grove. My brai nwave appears to have cracked this junction conundrum of traffic lights causing more harm than good and doing nothing not good enough. I'll chase officers for the latest time lines. Hi Kraken, Those speed signs tend to reduce average speed by 1-2mph. Helpful but not a panacea. Hi rahrahrah, Speed sinusoidal humps on Matham, Ashbourne and Chesterfield. Remainder speed signs.

Hi Katie1997, Why do you think the budget is bad for pensioners?

Hi trinity, I'll report it for you today. Regards james

Hi SCSB79, Yes, most roads in East Duwlich excepting the area bounded by Lordship Lane, Melbourne Grove and East Dulwich GRove and the area bounded by Lordship Lane, Watelely Road and Barry Road. Both these areas are about to become 20mph zones or speed limites after requested from residents to local councillors and using our devolvled Cleaner, Greener, Safer budgets from this financial year.

The last speed data I was sent showed vast majority stick to speed limit but frankly I only notice the selfish idiots going faster. I take a look at the weekend but if you think any signage has been damaged or badly placed tell me the specific details and I'll try and get fixed asap.

Hi trinitiy, Yes Ryedale/Underhill are within 20mph zone. Lets se what happens with CGS - which should be clear by June.

Hi trinity, Yes, that junction from my experienc can be tricky to cross. Monies for changes to roads - such as kerb buuild-outs - usually get spent retrospectively based on crash data. I've asked council officers for a meeting to talk me through the end to end process and specifically crash maps for Southwark and East Dulwich. I'd imagine no reported crashes at this site but it must make you hesitate about allowing your child to go to school by themselves. Normally in such circumstances we get a pot of capital money under the Cleaner, Greener, Safer banner every year and we'd often use a few thousands to fix such problems that don;t directly warrant collission reduction money but do need fixing when they become apparent. This coming financial year we're unclear on whether we'll have CGS funding - it appears to have been diverted for an Olympics fund centrally administered from the new Town Hall. Fingers crossed the CGS money will be reinstated. If it is I'd encourage you to apply for kerb buildouts at this junction. Seperately we're using some of last years CGS allocation to create 20mph speed limits on all the roads bounded by Lordship Lane, Whateley Road and Barry Road. This wont be a 20mph zone with humps everywhere as the vast majority of vehicles are travelling very close to 20mph already but such 20mph speed limits do have the effect of bringing speeds down several mph and should result in vast majority travelling at or below 20mph. We'll then see which roads are seeing greater than 20mph speeds and would then expect to have humps installed on an as needs basis. 20mph speed limits should happen in 8-12 weeks time. A speed review after about 12 months which should be timed nicely for the next CGS round.

Hi cassidy, The part of Adys Road you're having this problem with represents the border between South Camberwell ward to the west and The Lane ward to the east. So probably best that you contact the cllrs for those wards: South Camberwell ward: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] The Lane ward: [email protected] [email protected] vacancy - cllr Keadean Rhoden I believe has resigned.

Curiously comments submitted by Cllr Stephen Govier are not in the report. He CC'd me the emails. He clearly appears to know his stuff about licensed premises. I spoke to him last night about cross ward issues. I hadn't realised Lambeth licensing sub-committees meet in the evening rather than SOuthwark daytime making it hard to non licensees to attend.

The really clever trick if people want to hurt Lockheed Martin is to maximise turnout for the census. They'll have factored in a level of completion. The gap between full completion and the actual completion will be a large factor in how profitable they'll be. Maximising completion should see below expected profits. That's how to hurt them - the wallet. Finally enough Lockheed Martin were involved in the 2001 census as well and were paid ?54M. 2009 revenue for Lockheed Martin ?45.2bn.

It would be sad if Southwark suffered the consequences of another incomplete census. We've just had 10 years of lower council funding as a result of that. If someone doesn't fill in the census then I hope they at least have the decency to never whinge about pot holes, air pollution, fire service spending, school places and forecasts, social care, etc, etc, etc. The irony for me is people who boycott the census are making the contract more profitable for Lockheed Martin. Its a fixed fee contract. IF they have less work to do they make more profits. Go on you boycotters make Lockheed Martin richer!

The licence review will take place 10am Monday 28 March at the Town Hall. The papers for licensing sub-committee can be found here: http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=3757&T=10. The report appears to be missing several comments that I was copied. Hopefully the report can be rectified before the sub-committee meets. I'm hopeful the sub-committee will make a set of wise decisions. The Police have made very damning comments about how the current licence has been followed. It's clear some significant changes are required at this venue.

From what I can see "Trident 9.9m/Enviro400 double deckers introduced (from route 38)" will be introduced during April. The bus route is considered a high frequency routes with buses going every 7 mins in the rush hour and 7 an hour at other times mon-Fri. I guess this is what our bus fare rises are helping to pay for.

From what I can see "Trident 9.9m/Enviro400 double deckers introduced (from route 38)" will be introduced during April.

Hi Renata, So we're agreed. A cross party campaign to return the P13 to 15 mins frequency Mon-Fri?

Hi Renata, Specific examples of problems do add weight. But the key problems reported repeatedly is over crowding and reliability. To have this routes contract changed mid contract will need lots of evidence - ideally a diary of journeys. The P13 route doesn't make bigger buses possible but returning to pre Ken P13 cuts would be of great benefit in resolving the problems returning to 15 mins frequency rather than 20 mins. NB. I think it a bit disngenuous to suggest that any London Mayor who doesn't want to be told of any service cuts they are accountable for would be serving London well. Either he knew and wasn't bothered as the bus at that time went through safe Labour and Tory wards OR he hadn't told officials to tell him when they were cutting services OR he was told and thought them fine. None of these scenarios would reflect well on him from an East Dulwich, Peckham Rye or Dulwich Village perspective.