Agenda item

Report of the Executive Director, Environment.

The Sub-Committee considered a Gateway 3 report of the Executive Director, Environment which asked Members to note the feedback from the public engagements run in parallel with the Beech Street consultation. The report also sought approval for increasing the project budget to continue to develop the plan with Islington Council.

Members were advised there had been 189 respondents to the consultation, making 895 comments in total.

In response to questions from a Member about the programme, progress to date and when the project would be delivered, an Officer stated that there would be an initial meeting with Islington to set out the programme. It was estimated it would take 8-12 months to fully develop the plan including any required traffic modelling, and working with TfL if there were any implications on bus journey times etc.

In response to the Chairman’s questions about how the project would be staffed and the methodology for joint project oversight and reporting, an Officer stated that both the City governance and committee processes would be followed and in Islington, their governance and committee processes would be followed. Concepts and ideas would be developed at a workshop. Islington had a dedicated half time Officer, and with the budget increase, the City would have resources to progress this through the next 12 months with a dedicated project manager. The Chairman stated that these details must be worked out at the start of the project and agreed with elected Members in both Local Authorities to avoid any unnecessary complexity, delay and expense.

A Member suggested that the Chairman and Deputy Chairman have an initial meeting with Officers and the relevant Cabinet Member at Islington Council and Councillors from Bunhill ward so there was Member level agreement in the methodology to be followed and the outcomes to be achieved. There could then be further meetings at interim stages. He suggested these meetings could help avoid unnecessary delays and expense.

A Member asked about the air quality measures. An Officer stated that whilst Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 and PM 10 were still measured at multiple locations across the square mile, they were not considered targets in any specific project due to the nature of PM dispersing much more than Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). Members were informed that 96% of the PM in the square mile came from other boroughs and even outside the country so there was little control over it. NO2 was a target as it could be controlled within a few metres of its source.

A Member asked whether PM should be a target, as vehicles, especially electric vehicles, emitted particulate matter. He raised concern that this was damaging for health, especially as the particulate matter dispersed. The Officer stated that there was no way to measure it as a target. Although the number of vehicles could be measured, there was no way of ascertaining whether the source was local. The Chairman asked if a pan-London approach would be helpful in addressing this. The Officer stated that a pan-London approach would be beneficial but there was also a need for a national approach and an international approach. An Officer stated that the City had its own strategic approach and there was a London-wide strategic approach to not just have cleaner vehicles on the roads, but also fewer vehicles on the roads.

A Member asked whether the consultation process and the plan development would consider all options including Beech Street potentially being a zero-emissions street. The Officer stated that Beech Street and Chiswell Street attracted a lot of traffic as an east-west route. Traffic had returned to 2019 levels on Beech Street and this was likely to be for a variety of reasons. It was likely that a traffic restriction measure would be necessary. There were fewer people walking on Beech Street than in 2019 and the southern footway was rated F in terms of pedestrian comfort so was below he targets in the Transport Strategy. The Officer confirmed work would need to be done but this would not necessary be through a zero-emissions street.

RESOLVED - That the Sub-Committee

1.         Note the change in the project name and the extent of the project area from Gateway 2 as shown in Figure 1 of the Officer report;

 2.        Note the findings of the Public Engagement;

3.         Approve joint working with Islington Council to develop the Healthy Neighbourhood Plan; and

4.         Approve the budget increase of £109,000 from £141,00 to £250,000 to reach the next Gateway, funded from the City Fund CIL receipts as detailed in Table 3 Appendix 3 of the Officer report.