Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Deputy Alastair Moss, Deputy Chairman (absent due to his attendance at City of London Corporation business), Randall Anderson, Henry Colthurst, Sophie Fernandes, Deputy Brian Harris, Deputy Henry Jones, Judith Pleasance, Graeme Smith, Angela Starling. 

There were no declarations.

To note the draft public minutes of the meeting held on 8 November 2016.

Members commended the Town Clerk for an excellent summary of a complex discussion.

RESOLVED, that – the draft minutes of the meeting of the Streets and Walkways Sub Committee of 8 November 2016 be noted. 

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director in respect of development and advertisement applications dealt with under delegated authority. 

Members noted that the City had been advised yesterday of a decision to list 1 Poultry as Grade 2*, which superseded the decision taken a year ago not to list it.  The Chief Planning Officer had previously advised that this was a non-designated heritage asset and would be in contact with the developers in respect of implications on planning applications and further proposals.

RESOLVED, that – the report be noted.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director which provided details of valid planning applications received by the department since the last meeting.

RESOLVED, that – the report be noted.

60 London Wall London EC2M 5TQ

Proposal: Partial demolition and redevelopment to provide a basement, ground floor plus ten upper storey building, to provide retail (Class A 1) and/or restaurant (Class A3) (floorspace 2,319sq.m GIA) at ground floor and basement levels and offices above (Class 81) (floorspace 42,984sq.m GEA) with associated roof top plant, terraces, reconfigured servicing, ancillary cycle parking and other associated works.

Registered No: 16/00776/FULMAJ

The Chief Planning Officer (CPO) introduced the application and made a presentation, which had been emailed to Members prior to the meeting.  The Committee discussed the proposal and the following points were highlighted:

·       Officers had responded to an objection from the City Heritage Society.  This had not been withdrawn nor had further comments been made.

·       Some Members felt that the loss of the Arcade was regrettable but others felt that it provided very little amenity, given that it was north-facing, dark and lead to a dead end.  Members were reminded that the Arcade had been introduced as part of a possible widening of London Wall but this had been dropped in the 2015 Local Plan, as part of the City of London Corporation’s emerging policies on traffic reduction.

·       Given the forecast 25% increase in the City’s business population over the next 10 years, Members were concerned about preserving pedestrian space and officers were working on a policy designed to address this.  In respect of this development, Members noted there would be no alteration to the alignment of the frontage on Copthall Avenue and the increased footfall had been taken into account.

·       There were mixed views as to the design of the building but it was noted that the floor to ceiling windows would make for an attractive working environment.

·       The reference to three wheeled vehicle parking spaces applied to tricycles used

Resolution of the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee together with a report of the Director of the Built Environment.

NB: This report has also been considered by the Policy and Resources Committee and a copy of its resolution will follow.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of the Built Environment, together with resolutions from both the Streets & Walkways Sub and Policy & Resources Committees in respect of the current traffic situation in the City of London.  Members noted that the resolution from the Policy and Resources Committee of 30 November proposed 2 amendments to the resolutions set out in the report.

During the discussion and debate on this report and the resolutions, a number of points were raised by Members of the Committee:

·       There was a general concurrence with the resolutions from both the Streets and Walkways Sub and the Policy and Resources Committee.

·       Members accepted this was a key issue with unknown outcomes and therefore the report had been drafted in such a way as to highlight the key issues which Members may wish to consider at this stage.  Therefore, the report sought to demonstrate what the City of London Corporation were doing to achieve small ‘wins’. 

·       Members suggested that officers should investigate innovative solutions to assist in managing traffic and congestion levels, in order to achieve a shared space for all road users, with safety as paramount. Officers advised they were thoroughly investigating all the new smart technologies available to them.

·       Members noted that the new Mayor of London had produced a document; ‘City for all Londoners’ proposing radical changes towards reducing traffic in the City.  This document was currently with Officers and a response was required in January, at which time Members would be asked whether they would want to support the Mayor’s proposals.  

·       Officers advised that traffic levels in both Central London and the City had been steadily decreasing but delays in Central London had increased by 30%.  Members noted that the ring of steel isolated a lot of the City but there was still

To note the resolution from the Barbican Residential Committee.

 The Committee received a resolution of the Barbican Residential Committee in respect of the poor performance of the lifts at Wood Street and London Wall.  Officers advised that there had not been further disruptions since September but would closely monitor the situation.  Officers also agreed to investigate the ramp and signage in order to ensure that there was adequate and safe thoroughfare.

In respect of the erratic performance of the escalators, Members accepted that they were outside the remit of the City of London Corporation but officers agreed to talk to the Management Company for 124 London Wall to ensure they were being maintained regularly.

RESOLVED, that – the Resolution of the Barbican Residential Committee be noted. 

Report of the City Surveyor.

The Committee received a report of the City Surveyor in respect of lift performance.  In response to questions, Members noted that the Millennium Inclinator was now back in service and had only been unavailable for a short time.  The lift at the eastern side of Tower Bridge was waiting for an inspection and would be back in service shortly.  Officers advised that, for future developments, they would stipulate that lift mechanisms/storage rooms be easily accessible.

RESOLVED, that – the report be noted. 

The following items were discussed during questions:

·       Members had recently received an update on progress on the new Local Plan and noted that all businesses were being consulted and the consultation period had been extended by a month. 

·       Taxi companies had asked to be included in consultations on applications which might benefit from taxi ranks being located close by.

There were no items.