Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Emma Edhem, Gregory Jones, Alderman Vincent Keaveny, Graeme Smith and James Thomson.

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes and summary of the meeting held on 25 January 2017.

(The minutes were not available at the time of agenda publication and will be circulated separately)

The public minutes of the meeting held on 25 January 2017 were approved subject to:-

1.  the removal of Alderman David Graves in the list of Members present and to his name being recorded correctly under the apologies (Item 1);

2.  with regard to the planning application for 1 Leadenhall Street (Item 8.1):-

·        the voting be recorded as:-

17 votes in favour of the application

1 vote against

1 abstention

·        the following sentence being added to the end of resolution (c) “In respect of the servicing, this would be done in conjunction with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman”.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director, providing details of the development and advertisement applications dealt with under delegated authority since the last meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director, providing details of valid planning applications received since the last meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

(This item was not available at the time of agenda publication and will be circulated separately)

The Committee considered a joint report of the Comptroller and City Solicitor and the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director setting out the proposed reasons for refusing a planning application for the installation of two air conditioning units at Flat 17, The Gallery, 38 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7DE.

Members were reminded that in considering the report, should it be deemed necessary, only those Members who had voted when the application was considered at the last meeting would be able to vote on the matter now before them.

The Chairman advised that representations from the applicant and an objector had been received and that copies had been laid round the table. Members proceeded to read the two submissions and noted the comments contained therein.

The Chairman referred to the Committee being presented with the option of  approving the application on the basis of an established condition rather than agreeing reasons for refusal. He stated that such an approach would, in his view, set an unwelcomed precedent. The Committee had considered and resolved to refuse the application at its last meeting. Therefore the purpose of bringing the matter back to this meeting was to determine the reasons for refusal only. Several Members supported his view and the reason for refusal as set out in paragraph 3 of the report.

RESOLVED – that having considered and refused the planning application for the installation of two air conditioning units at Flat 17, The Gallery, 38 Ludgate Hill, London, EC4M 7DE at its meeting on 25^th January 2017, the reason for refusal be noted as follows:-

The air conditioning units could give rise to an increase in background noise levels resulting in a loss of amenity contrary to Local Plan Policy DM 15.7, having regards to the potential for the air conditioning units

The Committee considered a report of the Director of the Built Environment concerning the City Freight Strategy and the production of internal guidance on managing delivery and servicing in developments.

Detailed discussion ensued and a number of comments were made. Amongst other things, these included:- 

·         Whether any thought had been given to widening the scope of the guidance to include a means of engaging existing businesses and not just new ones;

·         The mitigation measures and strategies associated with improved traffic management needing to be more joined up, for example, ensuring that the hours of operation within the guidance accords with that of the Noise Strategy;

·         The guidance being perceived as a source of good practice and not just a tool for the use of planning officers;

·         Whilst the guidance represented a good start, the aspirations for improving traffic congestion needed to be more radical; and

·         Noting that a Freight Forum had been created and that its first meeting was due to take place on 3 March 2017. The Forum’s composition included representatives from businesses and its purpose would be to bring additional focus to the City Corporation’s aspirations for managing freight in the City and developing targets in order to drive initiatives forward. The Forum’s activities would be reported to the Committee in due course.

RESOLVED – that subject to the above-mentioned comments, the draft Delivery and Servicing Guidance and the proposed approach to negotiations, conditions and agreements as set out in the report be approved.

The Committee considered whether to withdraw a report of the Director of the Built Environment concerning the City’s objective in respect of buses and the City Corporation’s response to the GLA’s investigations into bus services in London. However, the Committee wished to proceed to discuss the report in respect of the City’s response to the GLA.

The Assistant Director of Transportation advised that, on reflection, the City Corporation’s draft response would benefit from further clarification and refinement. He therefore sought approval to the final wording being delegated to the Town Clerk to agree in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman. It was suggested that all Members of the Committee should also be given the opportunity to comment on the revised response.

The Committee proceeded to discuss the draft in more detail. Amongst other things the following comments were made:-

·         several Members were of the view that, in order to secure improvements to bus timetables and better planned routes, the response needed to be more robust and radical. It needed to encourage TfL to do the same in terms of its thinking;

·         outside peak hours a large numbers of buses were under-utilised. Therefore the frequency of buses during that period needed to be reduced. It was noted that this would also have a beneficial impact on costs and congestion. Caution should nevertheless be taken to ensure that it did not appear as though buses were not being used;

·         reference should be made to the introduction of the London Hopper as it would present TfL with the opportunity to explore and possibly rationalise certain bus routes;

·         it was important to provide analytical evidence in support of the City Corporation’s assertions. TfL should therefore be encouraged to share any relevant data it currently held.

RESOLVED – that the report be noted and

Report of the Director of Markets & Consumer Protection.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection concerning the City of London Noise Strategy.

Members discussed the content of the Strategy. It was noted that the Strategy had been approved by the service committee and therefore the Health and Wellbeing Board and the Planning and Transportation Committee did not have the opportunity to feed-in their views. It was therefore requested that in future more thought should be given to the committee timetable for considering matters such as this.

RESOLVED – that the report be noted and that in future, thought be given to the committee timetable for considering corporate strategies to enable committees with an interest to submit views prior to the approval of the service committee.

Report of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection submitting an updated version (Eighth Edition) of the Draft Code of Practice for Deconstruction and Construction Sites.

A Member stated that whilst he supported the draft Code, in future it would be helpful if changes and updates to standing documents such as this could be highlighted.

RESOLVED – that:-

1.       the revised Draft Code of Practice for Deconstruction and Construction Sites be approved and be published as part of the external consultation process; and

2.       it be noted that the final version of the Code would be presented to the Committee for approval in September 2017.

Report of the Assistant Town Clerk and Cultural Hub Director.

The Committee considered a report of the Assistant Town Clerk and Cultural Hub Director concerning the Illuminated River, a new public art initiative for central London bridges.

Members received a presentation on the project. It was noted that the proposals covered the illumination of 17 bridges in central London; a significant sum of funding for the project had been raised already; that officers were aware of the need for the City Corporation to maintain control over proposals for its bridges and that further reports would be submitted to the Committee on activities as the initiative progressed.

During discussion it was also noted that a part from a sum of £500,000 from Bridge House Estates, which had been approved as a contribution towards upgrading the lighting on London Bridge, no further City Corporation funds had been committed.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Sky Garden

In response to a request for an update on the improvements to Sky Garden, the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director advised that, as Members would have observed during their last visit to Sky Garden, significant improvements had been made to the layout, signage, planting and seating. This had greatly improved the general visitor experience to levels 36 and 37. The visitor arrangements and numbers to Sky Garden exceeded the requirements of the S106 Agreement and the introduction of walk-ups, where booking was not required, in non-peak hours had been a very welcome addition to the arrangements.

The Director was of the view that the changes made mitigated concerns and no further steps were proposed. The Director’s comments were noted.

Silvertown Tunnel Development - Consent Order:

Report of the Director of the Built Environment

The following item of urgent business was considered:-

Slivertown Tunnel Development Consent Order - Transportation of Dangerous Goods

The Committee considered a report of the Director of the Built Environment about the current proposals for the construction of the Slivertown Tunnel and concerns that it rendered the tunnel incapable of being used by vehicles transporting of dangerous goods safely.

The Assistant Director of Transportation was heard in support of the report and explained why it was important for the tunnel to be built so that dangerous goods could be transported safely via the tunnel rather than having to be routed through central London. Members supported his sentiments.

RESOLVED – that:-

1.          representations be made to the Planning Inspectorate’s examination into the proposed Silvertown Tunnel asking for the tunnel to be built so that it could accommodate vehicles transporting dangerous goods safely, thereby limiting the number of vehicles carrying dangerous goods having to travel through central London; and

2.          the Director of the Built Environment be authorised to make any further submissions and sign a Statement of Common Ground with the promoter (Transport for London).

MOTION – That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of the Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.