Jump to content

Recommended Posts

DuncanW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> I completely agree that trying to hold a street

> party in one of the very near-by roads would not

> be the best idea while the festival is on. Luckily

> we have a four-day bank holiday weekend, and GALA

> only runs for three days.


Street parties where road closures are required have to be planned months in advance with the council and emergency services (to ensure they know the road is closed) so the idea of being able to move it at short notice to another non gala day is frankly insane thinking.

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have quoted one of a number of online articles,

> and do not know their source for the 'recovery'

> aspect.

>

> This year, when the event organiser requested an

> in perpetuity licence for, I think, up to 4 events

> a year, Cllr Hamvas objected. I have looked but

> cannot find what the new licence covers. Do you

> know for sure that what they wanted was turned

> down?



Have you? All of the quotes you used are on the Friends of Peckham Rye website - http://www.peckhamryepark.org/news

They don't quote any source or evidence for this claim either.



The application was amended withdrawing the 'in perpetuity' aspect + some other amendments to reflect concerns that had been raised. The Licensing Authority then withdrew their representations against. TBF I don't think this info is on Southwark's website yet, but it was communicated by email to parties who have expressed interest.

So that website would have been the source for various articles, I am not involved with FPR but imagine they have the best interests of the park at heart.


It would be good to know that those amendments and withdrawals have definitely been made how did you find out about them?

DuncanW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> first mate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I have quoted one of a number of online

> articles,

> > and do not know their source for the 'recovery'

> > aspect.

> >

> > This year, when the event organiser requested

> an

> > in perpetuity licence for, I think, up to 4

> events

> > a year, Cllr Hamvas objected. I have looked but

> > cannot find what the new licence covers. Do you

> > know for sure that what they wanted was turned

> > down?

>

>

> Have you? All of the quotes you used are on the

> Friends of Peckham Rye website -

> http://www.peckhamryepark.org/news

> They don't quote any source or evidence for this

> claim either.

>

>

> The application was amended withdrawing the 'in

> perpetuity' aspect + some other amendments to

> reflect concerns that had been raised. The

> Licensing Authority then withdrew their

> representations against. TBF I don't think this

> info is on Southwark's website yet, but it was

> communicated by email to parties who have

> expressed interest.

I'm sure they have, but that means different things to different people I guess.


The info was sent to me in an email as I had expressed interest.


If you want to DM me your email address I can forward it on. Understand if you don't want to and would rather wait,

Thank DuncanW.


JohnL, legalalien kindly explained that it was likely this was not wholly sinister, in that the request was so the company did not have to go through the rigamarole of applying for a licence each year. That said, I think there is more control and accountability if they have to, which it seems they now will, if DuncanW is correct in what he has heard.

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thank DuncanW.

>

> JohnL, legalalien kindly explained that it was

> likely this was not wholly sinister, in that the

> request was so the company did not have to go

> through the rigamarole of applying for a licence

> each year. That said, I think there is more

> control and accountability if they have to, which

> it seems they now will, if DuncanW is correct in

> what he has heard.


Fair enough - I guess a legal term and not meaning until the world ends :)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • @CPR Dave He needs to communicate collectively with all of the beneficiaries.  That is the whole point of my original post.  Electronic communications are the best way of doing this, as I am doing now on this forum.  Apart from the gold digger who will get a six figure sum the rest of us are on four figures, and that is going down by the day. I'm offended by any suggestion that we are not behaving well.  What on earth do you mean?  
    • Surprise, surprise. It didn't take them long, did it. This will be something of a test as to how much the council really care about parks and the environment. A footfall of 60,000. Are they mad? There is no way this park is designed for or can sustain that sort of use. Just had a look at the schedule. If allowed to go ahead, this will involve a large slice of the park (not the common) sectioned off and out of use for three weeks of May and the first week of June. Here's an idea, why not trial the festival in one of the other Southwark Parks, so the 'goodness' can be shared around the borough?
    • There was another unprovoked attack on Monday this week on a young woman nearby (Anstey Road) at 6.45pm. Don't have any other details, it was posted on a Facebook group by her flatmate. Pretty worrying  https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1EGfDrCAST/
    • OMFG is it possible for the council to do anything without a bunch of armchair experts moaning about it? The library refurb is great news, as it's lovely but completely shagged out - the toilets don't even work reliably. Other libraries in the area will be open longer house during the closure. July is a rubbish time to begin a refurb because it's just before the entire construction sector goes on summer holiday, and it would mean delaying the work another 8 months.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...