Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Deputy Alastair Moss and Deputy Jamie Ingham-Clark.

Sheriff Chris Hayward was in the Chair.

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes of the meeting held on 3 February 2020 (TO FOLLOW).

RESOLVED, that the minutes of the meeting held on 3 February 2020 be approved as a correct record subject to the following amendments.

·         The reference to Whitefriars (p.4 of the agenda pack) be amended to note the area contained a number of characterful buildings and reference be made instead to the lack of trees and greenery.

·         The reference to ensuring new developments could be connected to Citigen (p.5 of the agenda pack) be amended to reflect the Member’s point that extra infrastructure was desirable.  

Matters Arising

Liverpool Street

In response to a comment from a Member, officers agreed to include reference in the Local Plan noting that the City would welcome Liverpool Street having appropriate capacity in future years.

Report of the Director of the Built Environment (TO FOLLOW).        

Members discussed a report of the Director of the Built Environment regarding the City of London Local Plan Review: Proposed Submission Version of City Plan 2036 and the following points were made.

·         An officer noted that Members had discussed the issue of housing at the last meeting and the current report had been prepared in response to those discussions. Officers noted that some housing issues were difficult to align with a 15-year forward plan, and Members were asked to bear this in mind. The officer continued, noting that options were set out within the report at paragraphs 14-19.

·         The Deputy Chairman (in the Chair) noted the comments made by the Chairman by email to those present that he supported the approach set out in paragraphs 15-16 (amend supporting text and amend policy) but did not feel that there was sufficient evidence at present to justify the identification of additional residential areas set out at paragraph 15.

·         A Member noted that in the public policy arena there were many problems best addressed by central government which were, in his view, pushed down to local authorities to deal with, one example being annual housing targets. In his view, this meant the Local Plan needed to address annual housing targets.

·         Officers noted that the City was meeting its annual housing targets, and that these reported retrospectively over three-year periods. They acknowledged that this was a problematic metric for the Plan’s 15-year period.

·         A Member commented that the City should publish metrics of the number of residential units delivered against those permissions granted by the City. Moreover the issue regarding housing was not one of numbers of units, but rather their affordability. This could only be addressed by a pan-London approach to central government. With that in mind, the Member was supportive of paragraphs

There were no questions.

There was no other business.