Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from the Deputy Chairman, Oliver Sells QC, and Paul Martinelli.

There were no declarations of interest.

To agree the public minutes and summary of the meeting held on 24 Jul7 2017.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 July 2017 be agreed as a correct record subject to the recording of the Chairman taking back the chair when he arrived at the meeting

Tarmac

The Chairman reported that he had now met with representatives from Tarmac and had received explicit reassurance that the contract would continue to operate at the previous high standards and that Tarmac were keen to build on Riney’s reputation.

Bollards/Bakers Hall Court

It was agreed that this matter should be added to the list of Outstanding References.

Report of the Town Clerk.

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

Parking for Motorcyclists

In response to a question concerning whether or not there was scope for any bays to be used as electric vehicle charging points, officers advised that this would be picked up as part of the review.

London Wall Place

Officers reported that it had not yet been confirmed that construction was completed and that the walkways were ready for adoption. The Sub-Committee would be advised as soon as this happened.

Naming of Streets/Highwalks after past Members

The Chairman read out the current policy for naming applications and advised that they were dealt with by officers under delegated authority unless the issue was contentious. However in this case the highwalks had already been named following consultation with Members.

The Chairman advised that the last time the P&T Committee had considered the matter of street and building naming was on 23September 2014 when an amended ‘Street Naming and Numbering Advice Note’ had been approved. This stated:

·         In applications to name streets after deceased persons, permission must be obtained from the person’s family or estate administrators. In order to be considered the individual in question should:

·         Have been dead for 20 years or have passed the centenary of their birth;

·         Have a significant and demonstrable connection to the site in question.

The Chairman advised that the P&T Committee could override these guidelines but would need good reasons to avoid unwelcome precedents being set.

Discussion ensued and while some members supported a departure from the policy, others felt that this required full consultation and a cost appraisal.

A member asked if it would be possible to name the link bridge after Mr Barker instead and the Sub-Committee agreed that this was a

Report of the Director of Built Environment.

The Sub-Committee received a report concerning the alternative junction layout and delivery of mitigation measures at Tudor Street/New Bridge Street.

The report sought agreement for officers to work with TfL to confirm whether the new alternative layout was viable through detailed design and modelling, and drew Members’ attention to the fact that if it is found to be so, then the cost would be in excess of £2.3M for which funding had not currently been identified.

Some members expressed support for work to continue on the revised scheme but voiced concerns regarding the additional costs and whether or not it would be possible to push back on some of the proposals, for example the additional bus stop. Members also suggested that it would have been helpful if the report had highlighted the differences between the scheme agreed by the Court and the revised one.

Jeremy Simons MOVED and Marianne Fredericks SECONDED a motion proposing that work should continue, but with the following conditions:

·         That a safety audit be carried out;

·         That detailed modelling on the additions and reductions to travel time be undertaken;

·         That an impact analysis on pollution be undertaken;

·         That any impact on the City’s road danger reduction targets be measured, including any liability of parties concerned; and

·         That an impact analysis of the closure of the bus-stop be undertaken.

Several members indicated that they did not support the motion which they considered was micro-managing and would just frustrate the process of negotiation with TfL.

Officers advised that most of the suggested conditions were routine and would be undertaken by TfL in any event. They further advised that it might be possible to push back on the additional bus stop with the aim of reducing costs.

Mr Simons advised that he would WITHDRAW the motion on the

Report of the Director of Built Environment

The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Director of Built Environment proposing works to accommodate the building on the public highway network. It was envisaged that the works would, amongst other things, include widening the footways, street lighting, drainage, the relocation of street furniture and an upgrade of the footway materials.

RESOLVED - To

1)            Authorise the City’s entry into a Section 8 Agreement with the London Borough of Hackney as detailed in section 25 of the report; and

2)            Authorise the City and the Developer to enter into a Section 278 Agreement as detailed in section 25 of the report.

Report of the Director of Built Environment

Members considered an issues report of the Director of the Built Environment regarding Bank Junction Improvements: Experimental Safety Scheme.

Officers reported that there had been an improvement in compliance, and it was expected that the numbers would continue to increase up to 95%. However the enforcement solution had proved more onerous than previously envisaged, and more staff hours were required to manage the process.

The Chairman reported that the scheme, although not perfect, was going well and the signage would remain under review. He had requested that further detail be provided on how vehicle volumes compared to previous periods, and also what the additional income would be used for.

It was agreed that the monitoring report should be circulated to all Members of the Sub-Committee.

RESOLVED, that subject to comments made by Members, the following recommendations be endorsed,

1)            Approve the revised estimated project cost of £1,355,403 for the Bank Junction experimental scheme.

2)            Approve the allocation of £208,306 from the On Street Parking Reserve account to the Bank junction experimental scheme

Report of the Director of Built Environment

The Sub-Committee received for information a Gateway 2 Project Proposal Report of the Director of Built Environment regarding the Temple Area Traffic Review.

The report advised that costs relating to highway consultancy work had not been included at this stage because it was anticipated that the consultant contracted by the Inns, Vectos, would initially provide this advice.

Members questioned the independence of the role of Vectos given that they had been employed by the Inns, and officers advised that their role was just to explore opportunities which the CoL could choose to be involved in. Any suggestions for change would then be assessed by CoL officers.

In response to a suggestion by a Member that the use of Middle Temple Lane as a rat-run be included in the review, officers agreed that traffic entering and leaving the lane could be monitored.

RESOLVED -  That the project proposal be supported, subject to the comments made by Members.

Report of the Director of the Built Environment

Members considered a Gateway 1 & 2 Project Proposal Report of the Director of the Built Environment regarding Sugar Quay s278.

RESOLVED – That the report be approved.

Report of Director of the Built Environment

The Sub-Committee received a report setting out a proposal to develop an enhancement strategy for the St Paul's area located in the south west of the City.  This plan was an identified activity within the Cultural Hub Public Realm Programme.

RESOLVED -  that the initiation and development of the St Paul’s Area Enhancement Strategy for up to £120,000, utilising funds from the Cultural Hub North-South Route Programme be noted.

Tudor Street 

A Member referred to the questions asked at the last meeting concerning what was the real issue at Tudor Street and how much in terms of resources and officers time had been spent to date, and asked why this information had not been included in the committee report considered earlier in the meeting.

The Member advised that during the meeting on 24th July, officers said the 'issue' was a perception held by some regarding access. However the evidence was that there were no access problems. Officers also said that they would be able to calculate the City's cost to date and that would be separate to TfL's considerable costs.

Officers advised that between 500-700 hours of officer time had been spent so far however to try and provide a more detailed breakdown of costs would be even more time-consuming.

Also the review was being undertaken following an instruction from the Court of Common Council.

Consultations

A Member asked if there was a need to review the CoL database in order to ensure that the correct information was available when undertaking consultation with residents and stakeholders and officers undertook to look into this.

It was suggested that a link to all CoL consultations should also be readily accessible on the external website.

There were no items of urgent business.

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

RESOLVED – That the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 24 July 2017 be agreed as a correct record.

Report of the Director of Built Environment.

Members considered a Gateway 3 & 4 Issues Report of the Director of the Built Environment regarding Current Security Issues, Hostile Vehicle Mitigation and General Security Update.

There were no questions.

There were no items of urgent business.