Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

To agree the public minutes and summary of the meeting held on 16 May 2017.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 June be agreed subject to the inclusion of the following amendments:

8.1 – Tudor Street Area Mitigation Measures – Statutory Public Consultation Responses

A Member queried the need to reprovide the displaced motorcycle spaces suggesting instead that motorcyclists be directed to Baynard House car park.

Arising from the discussion a vote was taken as to whether or not the displaced motorcyclists should be redirected to use other available car park space:

6 FOR

2 AGAINST

1 ABSTENTION

And the Sub-Committee RESOLVED to:

1)        Agree not to relocate the motor cycle parking to the western section of Tallis Street as agreed previously by the Court of Common Council on 12 January 2017.

2)        Agree not to reprovide lost motorcycle spaces on street and redirect motorcyclists to use other available parking space; and

3)        Agree that the objectors be informed of the decision accordingly.

8.3       Monument Subway

RESOLVED – That

2)         The developer be asked if the unspent funds of £58,334 could be put towards providing further historical signage.

10        Questions

Two Way Cycling in Seething Lane/ Muscovy Street.

A member asked why officers had not leafleted local residents and occupiers, outlining the proposal, as they had done so previously a number of years ago when the proposal was first suggested, and also why, given that circumstances in the area have drastically changed since the idea was first conceived, what review had been undertaken?

For example the redesigning of Seething Lane Gardens, the very busy bars, hotels with frequent taxi drop offs, the introduction of the CSH and the removal by TfL of the railings which used to run along the whole length of Byward St. As well as ongoing development along the road with construction vehicles, especially at the

Report of the Town Clerk.

RESOLVED – That the list of outstanding references be noted and updated as appropriate.

Swan Pier

Officers advised that a consultant had now been appointed to undertake a review of the repairs needed and that a report would be coming to the Sub-Committee after the recess.

Alderman Gowman, who had initially raised the issue, expressed concern that this would result in nothing being done until early 2108 which was a very long time. She further added that there had been no consultation with ward Members

The Committee considered a Gateway 5 issue report of the Director of the Built Environment concerning Crossrail Works and approval that the CoL Corporation deliver the works for Crossrail, starting with the Farringdon East element, followed by Moorgate/Moorfields and Liverpool Street in due course.

Members were advised that Crossrail had the authority to unilaterally deliver the works under their Crossrail Act powers, and were required to complete certain key elements by December 2018 to allow the relevant stations to open.

However, the presence of over-site development & adjacent building works would prevent large elements of these works being completed by December 2018, after which Crossrail would cease to exist as a delivery arm of TfL. As a result, Crossrail had discussed through a number of working groups with the CoL how the CoL could undertake the majority of these works on Crossrail’s behalf.

Members asked a number of questions in relation to the timing of the works, whether or not any liaison had taken place with Westminster, the need for further contingencies to be put in place, and the fact that the CoL would have to underwrite any cost overrun.

Members sought assurance that there were sufficient staff resources in place to deliver the works and also that consultation would be undertaken with local stakeholders and residents who would be affected by the traffic and pedestrian disruption.

Officers advised that there were sufficient resources in place and using Riney would ensure the City had full control on the quality of work and engagement with the community. However officers acknowledged that while the CoL undertook large amounts of consultation, TfL and Crossrail did not and it would therefore be necessary to consult further with residents.

RESOLVED – That

a)            Agreement in principle that the City deliver the urban realm

The Committee considered a report concerning the transportation network performance work programme.

Members had previously requested that they be made aware of current workload issues and, given the pressure on staffing resources, be given the opportunity to agree work programme priorities.

The report set out those significant work items that either directly or indirectly impacted upon the workload of the City Transportation’s ‘Network Performance’ team, and provided a proposed work plan.

Members were advised that the ‘Network Performance’ team within the City Transportation section was experiencing significant service demands and a workload that even if staffed to current full establishment it would not be possible to meet. It had therefore been necessary to recommend a review of service priorities.

The Chairman stressed to the Sub-Committee that these were the priorities of officers, and not Members, and the staff resource needs and costs for each project were indicated. He stated that the officers were really in a ‘no win’ situation and just needed an indicative list to work on.

Members expressed concern that the Sub-Committee was being asked to prioritise works when some less significant works had been required for a longer period of time.

In relation to the requests for market force supplements applied for in relation to a number of posts, Members indicated their support for this and stressed that the lack of resources to do the work required be flagged up with both the Town Clerk and the Resource Allocation Sub-Committee.

A member commented that given the current boom in regeneration work across the whole of London, it was imperitive that funds were made available to undertake works and to achieve the CoL’s strategic objectives and ambitions.

RESOLVED - to

a)            Agree the proposed highest priority programme (Appendix 1: table 1) which based on current staffing resource can

Verbal Update.

The Sub-Committee received a verbal update on the Tudor Street mitigation measures.

The Deputy Chairman stated that it all relevant parties had taken on board that a solution needed to be found as soon as possible, however officer time spent in relation to this was disproportionate to the size of the area.

Members raised a number of questions in relation to the installation of the parking restrictions in Bridewell Place, consultation with various stakeholders including bus-stop users and the study of the traffic flow.

Officers agreed to look into the parking restrictions at Bridewell Place as there had been some issues with the yellow lines. They further advised that the study of traffic flow was a major pieces of work likely to take up to a year, and that TfL were responsible for consultation with bus-stop users.

It was further agreed that a written copy of the update should be provided in addition to the minute and this is detailed below:

Tudor Street Briefing note

(1)Chairman, the last meeting of this committee was on 16^th May.  Since that time a considerable amount of officer time has been spent on preparation of background papers and briefings to ensure all key stakeholders were fully briefed. This includes Carolyn Dwyer and myself meeting representatives from the Middle and Inner Temples.

(2)The Director of the Built Environment and I have also met with Leon Daniels ( TfL’s Surface Transport Director) who has confirmed that there is no material change to the position reported to Court earlier this year, in other words Tfl are continuing work to develop a scheme that fully meets the City’s principle objectives and which both Tfl and the City consider to be workable and effective. Just to remind Members of the agreed principle objectives, these are

A

In response to a question concerning the unsightly painted markings on the road in the Tudor Street area, Members advised that these related to the Thames Tideway project and   would be washed away.

In response to a question concerning consultation and the fact that some processes were undertaken well and some less well depending on which area of the City was affected, officers responded that they considered the processes were consistent and appropriate however undertook to consider the introduction of a protocol.

Street Lighting Project – Gateway 5

The Sub-Committee was advised that approval was required to begin works in relation to the Street Lighting Project before the Projects Sub-Committee met on the 18 July 2017.

RESOLVED – That the Chairman and Deputy Chairman be authorised to approve the Gateway 5 request to begin works under delegated powers.

MOTION – That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act as follows:-

RESOLVED – That under Section 100A(4) 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 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

To agree the non-public Minutes of the meeting held on 13 June 2017.

RESOLVED – That the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 20 June be agreed as a correct record.

The non-public questions were noted.

The Committee received an update on Islington’s Controlled Parking Zone and the purchase of Riney by Tarmac.