Agenda item

Report of the Director of the Built Environment

The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Director of the Built Environment, seeking comment on the draft Transport Strategy, to be fed back to the Planning & Transportation Committee when the final draft is presented on 30 October 2018.

The Chairman advised Sub-Committee Members that the draft strategy had attracted a lot of media interest and praise for radical and innovative elements of the strategy. A new strategy was important given the expected growth in the near future and it was hoped the draft could be recommended unanimously to the Grand Committee.

A Member told the Sub-Committee that they strongly supported the strategy. Radical proposals were what was needed, and whilst some might not be immediately successful this should not be a deterrent. Temporary interventions and timed closures would support the project, particularly in working towards car-free days and pedestrian-priority areas. As it would be useful to have something to make publicity around, Members were advised that planning was underway for a car-free week round St. Mary Axe in September 2019.

The Deputy Chairman drew the Sub-Committee’s attention to the survey responses, specifically that greenery was the biggest non-transport topic amongst survey respondents. Technology was moving fast, and this could prove useful in taking environmental measures further. Members supported holding a combined meeting with the Open Spaces & City Gardens Committee, along with any other interested Members, to ensure these issues were taken forward, as it would not happen without joined-up thinking at Member and officer level. A cross-cutting reference group could also be set up to involve other stakeholders.

A Member added that the proposals were based on sound methodology and changes to the proposals should be based on evidence. The proposals on street obstructions should utilise the Corporation’s powers as the highway authority and it was a statutory duty to follow up on them.

A Member advised the Sub-Committee that the Active City Network had been briefed on the draft strategy and were very supportive. There was also a great base of support amongst businesses. It was important to remember that 25 years was a long time and things would change within the period. The Corporation could always review and challenge itself further.

A Member suggested that battery weight should be excluded from the measurement of vehicles to encourage the use of electric vehicles. It was also important to remember that vehicle numbers did not count for everything, as two small vehicles were preferable to one larger lorry.

A Member suggested adding a map or list to the partnerships and leadership section that set out stakeholder organisations in more detail, and asked what plans were in place to continue engagement during and after the consultation. The Director of the Built Environment responded that extra information could be brought to the Grand Committee meeting. Officers held a database of those who had given their details in their response to prior engagement and would continue to encourage people to sign up. There would be further engagement via the website. A Member suggested producing a communications template for Members to send to businesses. Some wards also had a business forum.

A Member advised that it would be helpful to make links to corporate risks, particularly road safety and air quality, and suggested adding mention of the Bank on Safety experiment as an example of using temporary interventions. The Director of the Built Environment responded that the corporate risks had not been picked up explicitly, but links to the Corporate Plan would be made. Amendments could also be made to bring out the health impact of air quality and to make reference to the successful Bank on Safety experiment.

A Member praised the strategy and raised a number of points for discussion. The strategy did not include anything on changing the aggressive cycling culture in the City. The timeframes used should be consistent throughout the strategy. The document also needed to explain the Healthy Streets Indicators used, as these were not currently set out, and should be clear that improvements to pavements were not for purposes of businesses. Blackfriars Junction needed more attention as a key walking route as it had been made worse by the current state of the underpass. A higher speed limit for the London Access street network could be considered as this might discourage the use of the other two categories of networks. Clarification was sought on pedestrian refuges, as they were good for safety and traffic, and were omitted from the section on pedestrian crossings.

The Director of the Built Environment responded to the points raised. There was a desire to change the culture and encourage safe behaviours for cyclists as well as motorists, but this could be made more explicit. It was hoped the 15mph speed limit would demonstrate that the City was different and promoted slower, calmer streets. Blackfriars Junction had not been selected as a key walking route as the routes had been selected by the number collisions in the area, but this would be kept under review. In the London Access network, some roads were managed by TfL who would not agree to different speed limits. The section on road user charging could be made clearer with regards to the position on taxis. Pedestrian refuges could be looked at, as they still fit the aim of priority for pedestrians.

A Member stated that road safety and cycle lanes could be complicated, as segregated cycle lanes were sometimes counter-intuitive to the flow of traffic. More educational signage may be useful to this end. The Director of the Built Environment responded that more information could be added on segregated cycle lanes and shared space. The aim was for legible streets that were obvious and easy to navigate.

A Member advised the Sub-Committee that they had agreed continuing involvement of the Transport Strategy Board, which would provide continued engagement. This was important politically as it represented component groups such as small businesses. A Utility Strategy would probably be needed going forward to tie in with the transport strategy. It was suggested that the strategy also looked at airspace, as the use of drones, for example, was likely to change the use of this space in future years.

The Director of the Built Environment replied that the Transport Strategy Board had been really valuable and officers would continue to engage. The Chairman added that it was hoped there was a place for it on an ongoing basis, and thanked Deputy Alastair Moss for chairing the Board meetings.

A Member pointed out that both miles and kilometres per hour were used in the strategy and suggested that one measure be used consistently. Members asked that a track-changed version of the draft Transport Strategy, which incorporated Sub-Committee Members’ comments, be tabled at the Planning & Transportation Committee meeting.

A Member suggested that the strategy do more to consider automated vehicles, which may become more commonplace in the coming years. It was also hoped the final strategy would do more to explain the real drivers behind the strategy. Policy references would be effective to this end as it would demonstrate joined-up thinking. The proposals on street obstructions needed to be clear on who had control and the ability to change things, as there was little power within the licensing system. References to the relevant legislation would be useful for this. It was also suggested that ‘public highway’ be used instead of ‘pavement’ as this was more suggestive of the need to be unhindered and unobstructed.

A Member asked how the key targets set out on page 93 had been benchmarked, and noted that there was no key target relating to air quality. The Director of the Built Environment responded that the targets had been devised from various places including the Mayor of London’s Transport Strategy and the Local Plans Sub-Committee. There were targets relating to air quality, such as the targets around zero-emission vehicles, and these could be added to the section.

The Sub-Committee discussed the section on key targets. Members suggested that all metrics should have 2030 targets, and stressed the importance of the targets as they highlighted current poor performance in some areas. As 2030 was a comfortable target, the 3-year delivery plan would provide the short-term targets to motivate action. The delivery plan would be submitted to Planning & Transportation and to TfL and would be updated annually.

The Chairman thanked Members for their discussion and officers for their work on a challenging and innovative strategy recommended that the draft Transport Strategy be put forward, with Members’ comments, to the Grand Committee.

The Director of the Built Environment confirmed that the consultation would include a bespoke website, briefing sessions and drop-in sessions for the public. Previously most feedback had been received via the online survey and this would be continued.

RESOLVED - That the Sub-Committee unanimously recommended that the draft Transport Strategy be approved for consultation, and that officers take the comments of the Sub-Committee into account and produce a track-changed version of the draft Transport Strategy to table ahead of consideration of the matter by the Planning & Transportation Committee.