Agenda item

Report of the Director of the Built Environment.

The Committee received a report of the Director of the Built Environment covering the draft Transport Strategy 3-year Delivery Plan 2019/20 – 2021/22.

The Strategic Transportation Officer indicated that a separate report focusing on Section 106 allocations would be submitted to the next meeting of the Streets and Walkways Sub Committee and then to this Committee. A final delivery plan would then also be brought back to this Committee at the conclusion of the Fundamental Review and reviewed by Members annually thereafter.

The Chair underlined that the delivery of the transport strategy was a political priority for he and the Deputy Chairman to pursue. He added that it was clear that action could be taken on some issues now and some projects delivered by the end of the year, whereas other issues had been paused pending the outcome of the Fundamental Review which was set to conclude in the Autumn. He underlined that the organisation were very much leading the way with this transport strategy and it would also have wider effects beyond the City.  

A Member made reference to the Riverside Walkway Project and underlined that what was needed here was completion of the project. The Group Manager Strategic Transportation reported that it was made clear throughout the strategy itself that the aim was to achieve the completion of the Riverside Walkway.

A Member expressed concern around the Fundamental Review which, in his opinion, would not only hold up many large Capital Project proposals but would also risk vital work like this becoming stalled or unnecessarily slowed down. He was of the view that the strategy should be pursued as soon as possible. He encouraged all Members of the Committee to also push this corporately. He concluded by stating that he personally considered that there were too many large Capital Projects being pursued and that this was at the cost of vital public services such as St Paul’s Gyratory which was currently on hold awaiting the outcome of the fundamental review.

A second Member agreed with this point and stated that he hoped that the pause around the Fundamental Review was just that and not a long delay.

A Member congratulated Officers on this report but underlined the need for Capital Projects to be properly developed and not in siloes. He referred once more to the Museum of London project as an example and reiterated the need to integrate work here in terms of public realm and, in this case, work alongside the London Borough of Islington. The Director of the Built Environment undertook to respond to Members in full on this matter but assured the Committee that work here was being undertaken alongside Islington on the borough boundary.

The Chair stated that he was surprised to see that some of the end dates were relatively close.

A Member referred to the budget stated in relation to the Smithfield Area Public Realm and Transport Measures and also commented that the end date stated seemed to be too late.

The Group Manager Strategic Transportation stated that, in some cases, there were elements of a project that could be brought forward and delivered in phases within the delivery times stated. Finsbury Circus was a working example of such an approach. He added that some timescales were ambitious and were based on Member feedback. He recognised that these may need to change as work progressed. Having said that, there was widespread support for the Transport Strategy including from TfL who were willing to try and accelerate any elements of projects that they could to help deliver it.

The Chair highlighted that an update on various Capital Projects would be brought to the Committee at the conclusion of the Fundamental Review. A Member questioned whether  the Committee would be presented with competing projects to prioritise as an outcome of the Fundamental Review. The Director of the Built Environment clarified that it was her understanding that some projects, including All Change at Bank, met the criteria to continue whilst the Fundamental Review progressed. Thereafter, it was thought that it would be for the Resource Allocation Sub Committee to prioritise projects corporately. Any grand Committee oversight of this process was still to be clarified. Members were of the view that it would be preferable to present Committees with choices as opposed to recommendations going forward. A Member also stated that the consequences of any projects that were to be potentially halted as a result of the Fundamental Review were widely known given that many could have a ripple effect.

The Chair stated that he was fully aligned with the principles of the Fundamental Review and that the outcome of this process should be awaited before this Committee then decided on any response to that.

Members questioned whether it would be appropriate for the Chair of this Committee to attend this weekend’s Resource Allocation Sub Committee Awayday where the first information on the Fundamental Review would be shared with Members and asked that he pursue this further with the Town Clerk.

RESOLVED – That, Members note the draft Transport Strategy Delivery Plan 2019/20-2021-22 (Appendix 1).