Agenda item

The Tulip – Appeal

A Member referred to an update circulated to all Members of the Committee in advance of today’s meeting and questioned the reference within the update to the applicant being willing to contribute the necessary funding for the City Corporation’s participation at the Inquiry. The update suggested that this was appropriate in the circumstances provided the City Corporation is transparent about this but the Member went on to question this statement and how the City Corporation could reconcile its quasi-judicial role as a planning authority with the proposal that it should actively support an appeal made by a developer in relation to an application that this Committee had previously considered.

The Chair highlighted that he had received an email setting out similar concerns from a Member who had been unable to attend today.

The Comptroller and City Solicitor reported that Counsel’s advice had been sought on this point and that the advice received had been as set out within the update to Members. She undertook to take the views of Members onboard but highlighted that the cost of participating in the Inquiry could equate to hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Members stressed that, despite the reassurances of Counsel, this was not a legal point but a political and reputational one. Members recognised that the City Corporation had a statutory duty to engage with the appeal and defend the position they had taken on the application but were of the view that they should do so independently in terms of costs.

In response to further questions, the Comptroller and City Solicitor confirmed that costs were already being incurred after engaging Counsel. She undertook to discuss with the Town Clerk how best to take forward a report to the Policy and Resources and/or Finance Committee to secure a budget for the City Corporation’s participation in the Inquiry and report back to this Committee in terms of next steps. She added that the costs set aside by the Mayor of London for this purpose were £350,000 and it was anticipated that the City Corporation’s costs would equate to between £100,000-£200,000.

Members were informed that this was the first case that had been refused in the City as a result of a Mayor’s direction and the first to be appealed – there was therefore no precedent as to how the matter should be dealt with.

The Chair received assurances from Officers that no funding had yet been received from the applicant and asked that they be notified of the Committee’s desire to fund the City Corporation’s participation in the Inquiry independently.

The Director of the Built Environment thanked the Committee for a helpful steer but confirmed that any funds would need to be sought from elsewhere as there was no available local risk or contingency budget. She suggested that the Chair and Deputy Chairman of this Committee would therefore need to be sighted on the potential costs associated with this before a formal request was put before the Policy and Resources and/or Finance Committee.

Barbican/Golden Lane Conservation Area

A Member questioned progress on the production of the Barbican and Golden Lane Conservation Area summary and Management Plan documents. The interim Chief Planning Officer and Development Director reported that it was hoped that a draft of both documents would be brought to the Planning and Transportation Committee in late 2020.