Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Randall Anderson, John Fletcher, Tracey Graham, Christopher Hayward, Deputy Tom Hoffman, Shravan Joshi, Oliver Lodge, Deputy Edward Lord, Andrew Mayer and Deputy Brian Mooney (Chief Commoner).

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes of the meeting held on 1 February 2022.

The Committee considered the public minutes of the meeting held on 1 February 2022 and approved them as a correct record.

MATTERS ARISING

Moor Lane (page 6) – A Member made reference to a further briefing note circulated to the Committee yesterday evening and the fact that this raised several important issues for Members. He went on to state that the proposals set out within the briefing paper were clearly contrary to planning policy in that they allowed for a number of security bollards to be located on the eastern side of the street rather than within the demise of 21 Moorfields. He highlighted that this would have a consequent negative, cumulative impact upon the Moor Lane greening plan. The Member recognised that, whilst the proposal was still to be finalised, it was clearly a poor substitute for the original plan, and featured some design proposals that were, in his view, entirely inappropriate for this location adjacent to the Barbican Conservation Area. He highlighted that the proposed introduction of seating here was also a concern to many and questioned how the Chair now intended to handle this matter.

The Chair highlighted that Officers were keen to hear Members’ views on the merits of the proposal and encouraged all those who wished to to comment on this by contacting Officers directly.

61-65 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2FD (page 8) – A Member highlighted that, when this application was considered at the last meeting, a number of health and safety concerns regarding fire and smoke moving from one window to another due to the design of the building had been raised.  She noted that this matter was to be resolved following the granting of planning consent but reiterated that she was uncomfortable with this approach, particularly considering the amount of funds that

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director regarding Thaives Inn House, 3-4 Holborn Circus, London EC1N 2HA – specifically making a group Tree Preservation Order (TPOs) on the London Plane Trees (Planatus x acerifolia) situated on the public highway on St Andrew Street, in front of Thaives Inn House.

A Member noted that the Officer report stated that these two trees which were 75 years old hold a significant role in the townscape form of Holborn Circus, frame an important view of Grade I listed church of St Andrew Holborn, are in fair to good health with a life expectancy in excess of 40 years, have high amenity value and, as mature trees, play a significant part in climate change resilience. As a result, the report logically went on to recommend the making of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) in respect of them. The Member went on to report, however that this appeared to be too good to be true and revealed that a planning application was made by TIH Ltd in October 2021 for the demolition of Thaives Inn House and its replacement by a larger office building. The new development entailed the adjacent highway being stopped up meaning that its ownership would be transferred from the City Corporation to the developer and that the two trees concerned, that stand on highway owned by the Corporation would be removed. He went on to remark that, it was not the Corporation’s proposal to make the TPO to protect the trees against the development and that the arboricultural report submitted as part of the planning application noted that the City’s planning officers had already agreed to these trees being moved as long as alternative greening was provided. It could therefore be expected that

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

N.B: Reason for background report being non-public has since been superseded.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director relative to Custom House, Lower Thames Street, London, EC3R 6EE – specifically, confirmation of a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) on the thirteen Plane Trees (Platanus x hispanica) situated along the southern boundary of Custom House adjacent to the River Thames.

RESOLVED – That the Custom House Lower Thames Street (2021) Tree Preservation Order be confirmed without modification.

Joint report of the Town Clerk and the Comptroller and City Solicitor.

The Committee considered a joint report of the Town Clerk and the Comptroller and City Solicitor regarding governance arrangements for the Barbican Podium Works.

A Member commented that he understood the logic of this report but highlighted that the last report from the Policy and Resources Committee to the Court of Common Council on governance arrangements commented on the ‘disaggregated’ way in which the Barbican Estate is managed with different departments/Committees responsible for things such as walkways, signage, repairs and cleansing and how this equated to a short-fall in the overall vision for the management of the estate. He therefore questioned whether the Policy and Resources Committee was the correct Committee to take responsibility for this.

The Comptroller and City Solicitor commented that other options appeared to be limited and that there was no obvious place for these responsibilities to fall in order to allow this Committee to take forward a decision on the planning application.

RESOLVED – That the Planning and Transportation Committee recommend to the Court of Common Council that the functions of Planning and Transportation Committee as walkway authority and under Part II of the City of London (Various Powers) Act 1967 in connection with the promotion of the Barbican Podium Works (but not the diversion, alteration, revocation or declaration of any City Walkway) be delegated to Policy and Resources Committee for the duration of the Barbican Podium project.

Report of the Executive Director, Environment.

The Committee received a report of the Executive Director, Environment, regarding the Climate Action Strategy and updating Members on progress towards achieving Square Mile and Resilience Projects.

A Member referred to the historic building energy retrofit challenge highlighted within the report and commented that this in fact involved two challenges – the technical challenge as well as an enforcement challenge. He underlined that he felt that this was a very commendable initiative but questioned how the City might meet the enforcement challenge going forward. The Chief Planning Officer and Development Director responded to say that it was correct that, in terms of planning controls, it was only in the case of listed buildings that Officers could insist upon certain things.  

Another Member welcomed the report but added that she felt that it was rather vague in some areas. She highlighted that the Climate Action Strategy was adopted in 2020, almost 18 months ago, and stressed that the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) was needed now. The timetable set out here suggested that the draft SPD would only be consulted upon later this year which seemed to be rather slow progress. The Member highlighted the importance of this matter and underlined that there were still no agreed metrics or benchmarks in place against which to evaluate planning applications. She reported that Officers had kindly shared with her a document entitled ‘City of London Local Monitoring Paper for Sustainable Development and Climate Change’ which was dated April 2020. She praised the document but also highlighted that this was now almost two years old and questioned whether this could therefore be updated and reproduced. She asked if the existing document could be shared with all members on this Committee. She underlined the need for urgent target dates and a clear programme, particularly around the

Report of the Executive Director, Environment.

The Committee received a report of the Executive Director Environment updating Members on progress with delivering the City of London Transport Strategy during Quarter 3 of 2021/22 (October – December 2021).

A Member noted that the report made reference to the Beech Street Zero Emission Experiment and requested an update from Officers on this. Officers reported that this had been discussed at the last meeting of the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee and that local Ward Members would soon be receiving a written update on the experiment. They went on to report that they had taken the decision to delay the consultation that was originally planned for the end of 2021 due to the reintroduction of COVID restrictions at this time. It was now envisaged that a new round of consultation would commence immediately after the City-wide elections before the matter was brought back to the Committee for a decision as to next steps in July 2022.

RESOLVED – That Members note the report.

Report of the Executive Director, Environment.  

The Committee received a report of the Executive Director, Environment setting out the progress made during Q3 of the 2021/22 Departmental Business Plan.

A Member referred to the dashboard and mention of 41 fatal casualties and serious injuries on the City’s street. She stated that this number was concerning and asked for further detail on this. Officers responded to clarify that this was an annual figure and was therefore for the last full year. The Member stated that it would be useful to clarify this in writing in future reports.

Another Member commented that it was useful to have infographics presented to the Committee but stated that these should also provide information as to how figures compared with previous years and present trends.

In terms of resources, another Member referred to the restructuring of the Department under the Target Operating Model and questioned if, when this was finalised, it could be brought back to this Committee for information. She added that it would also be helpful for the Director to address Members of this Committee as to departmental resources and her vision for the department going forward.

RESOLVED – That Members note the report and appendices.

Report of the Executive Director, Environment.

The Committee received a report of the Executive Director, Environment providing Members with assurance that risk management procedures in place within the Department of the Built Environment are satisfactory and that they meet the requirements of the corporate Risk Management Framework.

RESOLVED – That Members note the report and the actions taken in the Department of the Built Environment to monitor and manage effectively risks arising from the department’s operations.

Report of the Town Clerk.

The Committee received a report of the Town Clerk setting out its list of Outstanding Actions.

RECEIVED.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director detailing development and advertisement applications determined by the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director or those so authorised under their delegated powers since the report to the last meeting.

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 detailing development applications received by the Department of the Built Environment since the report to the last meeting.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

DBE Users Panel

A Member commented that she was surprised that this Committee had not been made aware of the existence of this Panel or its remit previously. She also stressed that information on the Panel and how to become a member was lacking on the City’s Planning Portal pages. She reminded the Committee that she had therefore raised questions on this at previous meetings and thanked the Chief Planning Officer for having subsequently provided her with the necessary information and copies of recent minutes of Panel meetings.

The Member went on to state that it was very clear from looking at the original minutes of the first Panel meeting that it was quite defined in terms of ensuring that this forum was involved in developing the service, a means by which stakeholders could make input to and participate in the development of the services provided, a mechanism to obtain constructive and informal input through various users and planning services and feedback . However, minutes from Panel meetings held over the past two years appeared to make it clear that the remit of this group had morphed into something entirely different. She felt that it did not appear to be properly constituted and neither was it clear as to how people could join the Panel membership. In fact, it appeared that the Chair was reaching out to developers to ask that they join. The Member went on to state that it was clear that these meetings also took up a lot of Officer time with at least seven senior Officers in attendance. It seemed that Officers presented applications to the Panel as opposed to seeking their feedback as was the case previously. The Member was of the view that this Panel were, in some instances, better informed of the workings

Public Lift Report

The Committee received a late, separately circulated public lift report of the City Surveyor.

A Member referred to the lift and two escalators at London Wall West which were important access points to the Museum of London and the Barbican Estate/podium and which had been out of service for some time now causing considerable disruption. He questioned what would be done to rectify this. He also went on to refer to the cleansing of these areas, suggesting that both required a deep clean.

Officers spoke to assure the Committee that the City Surveyor, as part of their reactive budget, accounted for a cleaning of the lift shaft and escalators and intended to now liaise with colleagues in the Environment Department about the cleaning of the walkways. Officers went on to state that, although the escalator was due to be brought back into service tomorrow (following an engineering inspection for health and safety reasons) there would also be substantial funding for the refurbishment of both the up and down escalators as part of the City Surveyor’s 2022-23 CWP Programme.

The Chair thanked Officers for this update and stated that he was pleased to hear that these works were to be expedited. He added that he hoped that the cleansing of this area would be ongoing.

Departing Members

Members took the opportunity to thank those who would not be standing in the forthcoming City-wide elections next month for their contributions on the Committee.

The Deputy Chairman also took the opportunity to thank the Chair for his leadership given that he would be standing down from the role after three years at the next meeting of the Committee.

Thanks were also given to the Deputy Chairman for his work on both the grand Committee and its Streets and Walkways