James Barber

Hi I'm watching you I B, Sorry I haven't a clue. A ?3 search of HM Land Registry would give it away but I've spent quite a bit with HMLR recently doing casework - so reticent to spend more.

Hi LocalMum, Cllr Rosie Shimell has taken up this casework. Hi pilsbury, goldilocks, The Leisure centre aircon and lift problems are unreal. The total renovation took place finishing 2011. So not exactly old and the lifts and aircon keep failing taking inordinate time to get fixed.

Still going to be a new Grove Vale public library. My understanding was Ivan Bateman had sold the development on some time ago.

Fortunately non of the cladding type used on the Grenfell Tower has been used in Southwark. So the specific scenario of the tragedy of Grenfell Tower and the immediate surrounding area isn't replicated here. Risks from fire though do exist where fire doors are propped open, combustible material is left on landings. We do have this at a few locations in the SE22 area and everyone is working to remove these risks and previous sceptical residents are now more understanding of not just th risks they are placing themselves under but also neighbours. What does help is all our blocks in my mind SE22 are lower than the tallest London Fire Brigade fire appliance reach (110'/33.5m).

....and you can always escalate a council failing such as you've described ChrisHolliday to a local councillor.

I've been told officially a few moments ago that "A stab victim drove into a P{police traffic accident cordon at Lordship Lane.Whateley Road junction at 1.20pm today. The stab victim is in a life-threatening condition in hospital, He is in his twenties. We have no information on where the stabbing happened."

Hi Goldilocks, The building site next to the Dulwich Leisure Centre on Crystal Palace Road is meant to operate to a Construction Management Plan agreed with council officials - http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk/documents/?casereference=16/AP/4294&system=DC The original proposed plans I and several residents objected to. We asked that deliveries not take place 8-9am and 34pm i.e. school arrival/departures. Council officers ignored these objections. In fact the amended CMP specifically stated they would deliver at these time. In fact to make matters worse they agreed to the pavement on the western side being closed during construction hours. The current administration is extremely developer focused - hence why this over development for the site breaching suburban densities of rooms per hectare. Letting developers have such lenient Construction Management Plans is another symptom of this ignoring in this case the large numbers of young children passing through the area along with heavy construction lorries. I'm sorry I've not been able to get the council or developer to act responsibly. My main hope now is they finish quickly returning the area back to us. Therefore I would counsel significantly more caution in the area especially the junction of Crystal Palace Road with East Dulwich Road where heavy lorries are turning.

Hi Mimmum, Yes, and I've contacted council officers repeatedly seeking enforcement against this garage works taking place on the public highways. They have to catch them in the act and so far have failed do this despite the photographic evidence you and I have provided them. Frustrating beyond belief. It may reach the point where I initiate a Councillor Call for Action - this is where all public bodies are brought together to decide the best way for them to work together to resolve this.

Lets not forget some pavements have cycle paths or shared use on them. Hi Mugglesworth, That how they operate on all pavements and roads - the stronger party in a collision is assumed guilty unless they prove otherwise and the weaker party in a collisions is assumed innocent. Works treat for neutering safer roads and pavements.

I'm with you on this JoelLeg. Cycling Uk make a more balanced and nuanced statement about pavement cycling -http://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/margaretanneorgill/what?s-legal-?-what?s-bike Pavement cycling: Firstly, the legislation doesn't refer to pavements, and neither does it refer to cyclists. That's important because there are tracks and shared use paths where cycling is not illegal. It's an offence to drive a carriage on "any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers", essentially a footway next to the highway (different but equivalent legislation applies in Scotland). The law also applies to children, but as those under ten are below the age of criminal responsibility they can't be prosecuted (watch out in Scotland however, where criminal responsibility starts at eight, though the Scottish Government has announced plans to increase this to twelve). Being too young to prosecute unfortunately didn't stop a policeman in Lincolnshire threatening to confiscate a four year-old's bike after he spotted her cycling along the pavement in 2015. Fortunately, when FPNs were introduced for pavement cycling in 1999, Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued guidance saying that: "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief Police Officers who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required". The Home Office guidance was re-affirmed in 2014 by the then Cycling Minister Robert Goodwill, who agreed that the police should use discretion in enforcing the law and recommended that the matter be taken up with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). ACPO welcomed the renewed guidance, circulated it to all forces, and issued a statement referring to "discretion in taking a reasonable and proportionate approach, with safety being a guiding principle". To summarise, cycling on the pavement is still an offence, but there is clear guidance that the police are supposed to exercise discretion. And finally on pavements, remember that on segregated cycle tracks the pedestrian side remains a footway, so if you cycle into the pedestrian side to pass a pedestrian in the cycle lane you technically commit a pavement cycling offence. There's an anomaly because cyclists have to ride on their side, but pedestrians are only advised to use theirs.

Hi worldwiser, Can you show me on Saturday morning please?

Hi esme, Certainly the Lordship Lane paving. I've walked the lane with officer and they're preparing a schedule of things that need fixing based on our audit. I'll make a point on Saturday of walking NCR hunting for more issues. SMB. Anyone can park there. Generically do you think such sections we need to make the pavement wider? Several other parts of Lordship Lane where the private pavement is used and footfall seems such that the pavements can't cope?

Hi PandG, Southwark charges Zipcars a great deal of money for each formal and reserved parking space for Zipcar. Effectively a tax on people car sharing. It would make lots of sense for car sharing organisations to find a way of circumventing this. Southwark are also going to market again for their car sharing relationship. This would add extra pressure to insure against the loss of this relationship by Zipcar. If they're still reducing the demand for people to permanently own their owns cars then overall it saves significant parking space. Which doesn't make it any less annoying if you're used to parking outside your own house. But Zipcar wont deploy more cars than they can cover their operating and capital costs. So we shouldn't expect otbe over run with such cars. And research suggests up to 25 private cars over time are replaced by each shared car such as a Zipcar. If anyone finds an excess of these let me know ASAP.

Hi Abe-fromena, No. What the council has done and can do is obtain permission from landowners to renew private pavements. But the quid pro quo is the council requires a written agreement that the land will remain accessible to the general public. So in this case either the charity or the freeholder will be required to renew and make safe their pavement or the council would do it after obtaining a signed document confirming public access.

Hi Abe_froeman, IF the council funded fixing that pavement the landlord would be handing over a permanent right of way. That is a good thing.

Hi siuosxiesue, That's the prime spot we noted to get fixed. It is private land but I can't imagine a charity so we will consider using some of our devolved funds to solve this.

Hi scrawford, I'm really sorry to hear you've had this problem. I had been assured this problem had been fixed about a year ago. I will raise the matter again - it would be REALLY helpful if you email me when this happened - real examples get quicker traction from council officials in my experience.

Hi edhistory, The officers were from planning enforcement - but kindly have taken away a list of a frames placed incorrectly. We also noted some pavement on private land that we need fixed.

Thanks Esme. Managed to attend walkabout along Lordship Lane with council officers and fellow councillor looking at breaches of planning and advertising rules. Determined to tidy Lordship Lane up.

speak to Ofcom.

Hi esme, The School Cuts campaign has no events planned in Southwark - https://schoolcuts.nationbuilder.com/?email_address=&address_change%5Bsubmitted_address%5D=se5+8bs&address_change%5Bdistance%5D=1&commit=Search But nothing to stop you running a street stall against them - I have a batch of their leaflets you could use some of those. You could print a petition against the cuts. If you do decide to do this you can publicise it here - https://schoolcuts.nationbuilder.com/forms/user_sessions/new Happy to talk you through this. I would normally jump in but I'm virtually housebound with a foot injury currently and have to prioritise getting well to go to work. You could also ask friends and family to contact their general election candidates -https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#!/email-your-candidates support the campaign through social media. Lots you can do.

Yes, the Council has waited until the last tenant is no longer resident - they passed away. They've nearly secured them - they had some squatters. They then propose to build some council housing.

Please do keep the emails going into the Royal Mail CEO. They wont talk further to politicians until after the general election - purdah.

This is the answer I've received: " Dear Councillor Barber Thank you for your enquiry regarding the Council's Street Works web site. Due to the changes and improvements to TfL's web site, London Works, the Council will be removing the central register from it's own web site and directing users to http://public.londonworks.gov.uk/roadworks/home All of the permittable works in Southwark upload to London Works in the same way they would upload in to the Councils site. If you have any questions about this response please do not hesitate to contact me.... " I've asked when can the Southwark website and Maps system reflect this and told "work in progress". Regards James. TheArtfulDogger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi James > > Can you let us know if the Southwark street works > register is still being updated by the council as > I've noticed a number of old entries still showing > and nothing new for a while. > > It's a useful tool but only if it's accurate

Hi Siduhe, A decision has been taken. But that decision has a window whereto council main Over & Scrutiny Committee can call it in to be reviewed. That committee can then leet it proceed or ask for the decision to be reconsidered. I am talking to the clerk of that committee about calling the decision in.