Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Marianne Fredericks and from Christopher Hayward.

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes of the meeting held on 12 October 2021.

The Town Clerk confirmed that discussions were ongoing on the best way to produce an accurate and concise record of meetings: discussions have taken place at the Corporation around the use of transcripts but that has, for the time being, been ruled out given the cost and the imperfect technology. The Committee agreed that the format and scope of the minutes should remain unchanged for now. 

RESOLVED, That the minutes of the meeting of 12 October 2021 be approved as a true and accurate record of the proceedings.

To consider the Report of the Executive Director Environment.

The Committee heard that correspondence received on the subject suggesting that a diverse range of views existed, and that a wide and comprehensive public consultation was an optimum way forward.

A Member made the following points:

-       option 1 and option 2 are not necessarily in opposition to each other as option 1 could be progressed in parallel with initial work on the area wide approach in the Healthy Streets Plan (option2)

-       there is merit in presenting a wider range of options and consulting a wider audience of affected people

-       a clearer understanding of phase 2 would be helpful

-       modelling might need to be reviewed

-       London Wall congestion is more than “sporadic” (paragraph 71), and pollution levels there are likely to get worse

-       clarity of signage continues to be an issue

-       compliance is problematic at 10%, with a lot of PCNs being handed out.

The meeting heard that the consultation option was a preferred way forward, though issues may emerge from the Healthy Streets Plan in relation to Beech St. The modelling was based on a range of pieces of work completed by TfL and CERC, among others, that would guide further work around traffic reassignment. The meeting heard that compliance is relatively low compared to Bank partly because the scheme has not been in place for as long as the Bank scheme.

A Member commented that the scheme had not necessarily been presented accurately, and that progress had been good. 

A Member suggested that there was merit in the Committee having oversight of the outcome of any delegated authority decision.

A Member expressed concern that the evidence presented did not necessarily support the suggestion that there had been “meaningful” air quality improvements (paragraph 116).

The Sub Committee heard that the reduction was significant

To consider the report of the Executive Director Environment.

The Sub Committee considered the report of the Executive Director Environment.

The Chairman commented that this phase of the scheme finally delivered significant increases in space dedicated to pedestrians who were the biggest users of the junction, and would increase safety for the most vulnerable users which was the primary objective of the projective.

A Member welcomed the proposed changes to the area and expressed disappointment that taxis (even electric ones) were not allowed in the area—even through the sections that were allowable to buses—and queried whether the area’s role as a ceremonial space had been properly taken into account.

The Sub Committee heard that the ceremonial element of the space had been taken into account in respect, particularly, of the Lord Mayor’s Show, and that some of the proposed street furniture was removable. The Sub Committee heard that other ceremonial events were expected to be taken into account for future planning, including Remembrance Sunday.

A Member commented that the proposals were a flagship scheme for the Corporation and suggested that the focus on pedestrians and more greenery was welcome. The Member queried whether a 20% cost uplift was proportionate, referring to it as built-in pessimism.

The Sub Committee heard that the 20% uplift was based on observed inflation in highways projects currently, not inflation generally.

Members suggested that cycle movements and behaviour should be examined in greater detail, and sought clarification on when the 12-month period following completion was to begin. 

Members heard that completion referred to construction completion which was expected to be during summer 2023 (so a review would need to have been completed by summer 2024), though peripheral works could continue beyond summer 2023.

Members heard that a clear physical demarcation to facilitate cycle-pedestrian segregation has been planned.

A Member suggested that chicanes might be

To consider the report of the Director of the Environment.

RESOLVED, That Members

1.    Approve the project’s closure once the outstanding actions referred to in section 13 are complete.

2.    Approve the budget adjustment outlined in Appendix 4, table 4, existing funding commitments with JB Riney to be receipted.

3.    Authorise the return of any underspend funds to the developer or their successor in title following closedown of the accounts related to the Section 278 and Section 106 contributions.

To consider the report of the Executive Director Environment.

RESOLVED, That Members

1.    Approve the budget of £65,000 to reach the next Gateway;

2.    Authorise officers to enter into a section 278 agreement with the Developer;

3.    Note that the total estimated cost of the project is £400,000 - £550,000 (excluding risk).

Report of the Town Clerk.

The Sub Committee received the list of outstanding references.

To consider the report of the Environment Department.

NB: Appendix 6 to this report is classed as Non-Public

A Member pointed out that there appeared to be no agreement to move a working market, that some of the current proposals were “fanciful” and did not appear to work well with the current Smithfield market, and that tenants and those working in the market had not been properly consulted. The current proposals would impede the movement of vehicles loading and unloading for the market, negatively affecting access to the market. The Member objected to the proposals in the strongest terms, suggesting that the report be reviewed, that tenants be properly consulted, and that the poultry market not be included in the project given that it has not been declared as surplus and continues to be a working market.

Two further Members agreed that there had been no proper consultation with tenants, and commented that Area 1 referred to places that were essential to the market’s proper operation (such as Charterhouse Street, Smithfield Street, and West Smithfield), and that Area 1 covered too wide an area.

The Sub Committee heard that local stakeholders, including the market Superintendent, were being consulted as part of the ongoing developments and that the current report was focussing only on Area 1 at the western end of Smithfield - the overall vision statement did not refer to work currently being progressed.

The Sub Committee commented that there was merit in the project being reviewed for proper scoping and proper consultation.

The Sub Committee agreed that elements of the project proposals referred to items that needed to be considered in a non-public setting, and that the discussion should be moved to the non-public part of the meeting.

There were no questions.

The Sub Committee heard that a closure at Cannon Street (13 December to 19 December 2021) for gas connection works was required, so current restrictions are to be relaxed in one direction resulting in a likely increase in traffic at Bank junction during that period.

A Member asked whether necessary diversions such as these had been incorporated into future plans, and the Sub Committee heard that such restrictions had been factored in to cater for planned and unforeseen works along other streets such as Queen Victoria Street and Threadneedle Street.

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 Members agree to exclude the public.

To agree the non-public Minutes of the meeting held on 12 October 2021.

Members considered the non-public minutes of the meeting of 12 October 2021.

To consider the report of the Executive Director Environment.

Members considered the report of the Executive Director Environment.

To consider the report of the Director of Environment.

Members considered the report of the Director of Environment.