Agenda and minutes

To note any changes to the membership.

1.1      Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Karen Scarborough and Cameron Thomson.  It was noted that Councillor Jan Prendergast had replaced Councillor Thomson.  The Chairman advised the Committee that Councillor Scarborough was unwell and there had therefore not been time to seek a replacement.

To receive declarations by Members and Officers of the existence and nature of any personal or prejudicial interests in matters on this agenda.

2.1       There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on Monday 19 January 2015.

3.1       RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on Monday 19 January 2015 be signed by the Chairman as a correct record of proceedings.

Question And Answer Session With The Cabinet Member For Sustainability And Parking

See Follow On Agenda

4.1       The Committee received written updates from the Cabinet Member for the Built Environment, the Cabinet Member for City Management, the Cabinet Member for Sustainability and Parking on significant matters within their portfolios.  

4.2       The Chairman welcomed Councillor Heather Acton, the Cabinet Member for Sustainability and Parking, to the meeting.  The Committee put questions to and received responses from Councillor Acton on the following matters that were relevant to the Sustainability and Parking portfolio:     

4.3      Cycling safety – The Chairman asked Councillor Acton to set out what the Council was doing in terms of playing its part in the borough being as safe as possible to cycle in.  The Cabinet Member replied some of the steps taken included that the Council had produced a Cycling Strategy with the input of the Committee’s Task Group and had spent £1.6m on safer cycling this year and next.  It had also worked closely with Transport for London (‘TfL’) on the cycling superhighway proposals and had doubled adult safer cycling training.  A new app was being designed which would link cycling with better health, reducing obesity and improving air quality.

4.4      East-West Cycle Superhighway – Councillor Jonathan Glanz made the point that he had only become aware of a meeting on the Cycle Superhighway a short time before it had taken place.  He asked whether Members representing wards affected by the proposals would have ample opportunity to respond to the consultation process.  Councillor Acton stated that she had attended the meeting on Cycle Superhighway 11 (the route is from Park Royal, Brent to Hyde Park Corner) earlier that evening.  It had been well attended by the likes of the Royal Parks, the amenity societies and also Councillor Rigby.  She added that she would ensure that Councillor Glanz received feedback from the meeting.       

4.5      Biodiversity and Open Space Study – Councillor Thomas Crockett asked how much the Study had cost and how it was funded.  The Cabinet Member informed him that the Council was not funding the Study and she would send the necessary details to him.  She emphasised the importance of open spaces which was always a top priority for residents and had a positive effect on both mental and physical health.  Barry Smith, Operational Director, City Planning, informed Members that the requirement for a biodiversity strategy/action plan was a statutory responsibility for the Council.  A lot of work had been undertaken in recent years, particularly by the private sector, regarding green infrastructure.  The Study would contribute to policy formulation going forward and provide an up to date evidence base for negotiating new and additional green infrastructure.

4.6      New Contracted Parking Service – Councillor Jan Prendergast expressed concerns regarding the issues that had arisen as a result of the implementation of the new parking contracts.  She was aware of a number of customers who had experienced considerable inconvenience and had not been given an adequate apology or explanation.  One resident had had to take time off from a demanding job and had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.1       Broadband coverage in the borough had been scrutinised by the Committee at the previous meeting in January.  It had been recommended at that meeting that the Committee’s work feed into a Member led meeting with large property companies, landowners and providers taking place on 5 February.  This had been arranged in order to find solutions to poor broadband quality and speeds in Central London which was a very real concern to small businesses and residents and below the levels of international competitors.  Councillor Glanz, Lead Member for Connectivity, provided his fellow Committee Members with an update on the February meeting.  It had been identified that the drawing up of legal agreements, for property owners to permit their buildings to be served either by fibre to their properties distributed to customers via service ducts or by the provision of roof top equipment allowing faster transfer via a satellite link, was a lengthy process.  The providers also had their own terms and conditions and overall it took approximately eighteen months from the identification of an appropriate site until the provision of the broadband at that site.  Over 60% of the sites were individually negotiated.  At the meeting best practice documentation was proposed which would prevent the need for individual negotiation and that would cut the time for broadband to be provided at a site significantly, potentially from eighteen to six months. 

5.2       Councillor Glanz stated that BT had not to date enabled four of the eighteen exchanges that serve Westminster to be provided with the necessary fibre optic connection.  Virgin had now announced that they would be investing £3 billion on superfast broadband in Central London.  At the moment people in London were fortunate if they received broadband speeds of 20Mb which was not sufficient for graphics or tech related businesses.  Virgin was claiming to offer speeds of up to 152Mb.  It was anticipated that within five years the average user would require 167Mb and it was therefore necessary to be focussing on the requirement for ultra-fast broadband that was available in far eastern cities in order to maintain competitiveness on an international level.  Landowners were therefore being encouraged to incorporate ultra-fast broadband into their properties.  It would also be necessary to continue to lobby national government on this issue. 

5.3       Councillor Glanz offered to keep Members updated on developments.  He also informed Members that action notes had been taken of the meeting of 5 February and that these could be circulated to the Committee.

5.4       RESOLVED: That the action notes of the 5 February meeting attended by Councillor Glanz be circulated to Members of the Committee.

Report of Director of Policy, Performance and Communications

6.1      Barry Smith introduced the item.  The views of Members were being sought prior to the draft strategy being produced.  In 2012 officers were set a ‘Better City, Better Lives’ corporate target of producing a cycling and walking strategy.  After discussions with Councillor Argar, the responsible Cabinet Member at that time, it had been decided that the strategies would be produced separately as cyclists and pedestrians had different priorities and the Council needed to respond to the Mayor’s recently published cycling strategy.  This Committee had played a key role in scrutinising the cycling strategy having been given the opportunity to comment at an early stage in its development.  The Cycling Strategy had been published in November last year.

6.2      Mr Smith advised the Committee that the draft walking strategy was not starting from scratch as a Walking Strategy had been produced previously in 2004.  Priorities and initiatives in the 2004 Strategy had been delivered through services such as highways and street management including public realm improvements, Legible London signage and de-cluttering.  It was recognised that there was more to do, particularly as the projected increase in our resident, worker and visitor populations would put more pressure on our already congested streets.  The aim of the Strategy would include addressing the needs of pedestrians and making the environment more attractive and user friendly.  This would encourage more people to walk rather than using other modes of transport, particularly shorter distances.  Mr Smith stated that there were questions in the report for Members’ consideration, including whether the Committee wished to establish a task group to provide input towards and scrutinise the draft Walking Strategy as it develops, as was the case with the Cycling Strategy.  The Council’s strategic policies very firmly stated that the pedestrian is a priority.  The timeframe for the Strategy up to 2030 took into account Crossrail 1 opening in 2018 and Crossrail 2 that was proposed to open in 2030.  Mr Smith emphasised the fact that the Council had limited budgets with contributions being required from the likes of TfL, public health, Section 106 and potentially Community Infrastructure Levy monies.

6.3      Members had provided Peter Hartley, Chair of Westminster Living Streets with an opportunity to address the Committee.  Mr Hartley informed those present that there were six members on the Westminster Living Streets committee and it was part of the national Living Streets organisation which represents pedestrians and campaigns on their behalf.  Westminster Living Streets had approximately 250 supporters.  Mr Hartley stated that the term ‘pedestrian strategy’ was more appropriate than a ‘walking strategy’.  He commented that he wanted to work with the Council but expressed misgivings from his experience of his communications with councillors, including Cabinet Members and also officers and their departments over the previous two years.  It was his view that the Strategy was essential but he did not believe that the more difficult issues would be discussed whilst it was being developed.  Mr Hartley spoke in favour of 20 miles per hour limits  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Report of Director of Policy, Performance and Communications

7.1      The report received by the Committee included a summary of the key actions and progress since the Air Quality Action Plan had been adopted in April 2013 and provided Members with an opportunity to make suggestions on issues and topics for review during the development of the next Air Quality Action Plan due in 2018.     

7.2      The item was introduced by Jennie Preen, Project Manager, Air Quality.  She stated that reviewing and assessing local air quality and taking action to improve poor air quality is a statutory duty for the Council.  The first Action Plan had been introduced in 2001.  This Committee’s predecessor had been involved in scrutinising the development of the most recent Action Plan in 2013 and there had been a full public consultation exercise which meant that there was interaction and engagement with a wide set of stakeholders.  Ms Preen referred to the potential health problems caused by poor air quality and the predominant causes of poor air quality which are transport vehicles and buildings, including heating and energy plant.  The Action Plan focuses on reducing emissions from transport and the built environment and on communicating about air quality issues, including communicating directly to those with health conditions.  It also make a commitment to continue to monitor the borough’s pollution in order that action can be taken.

7.3      Ms Preen reminded those present that the Mayor of London had his own Air Quality Strategy and the Council only had a limited set of tools to effect change in its area.  The Mayor managed the strategic TfL road network in the capital and also buses and taxis, the most significant transport polluters.  The Council was able to work with the likes of businesses and schools and had planning policies in place to ensure any new development in Westminster would minimise their impact on air quality.  The Council has a very limited budget and would have to fund any actions going forward via government grants and/or TfL funding.

7.4      The Committee asked a number of questions on this topic:

·           The Chairman asked which areas referred to in the 2013-18 Action Plan were the Council ‘behind the curve’ on.  Ms Preen stated that a significant number of actions in the Plan were based around lobbying and working with the Mayor and other stakeholders, in particular those aspects where the Council had limited powers.  Whilst not being ‘behind the curve’, there was a capacity to do more in terms of lobbying the Mayor on buses or taxis.  Included within the report was a section on the Mayor’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (‘ULEZ’) scheme and the Council’s response to the ULEZ consultation.  The consultation response had strongly recommended that improvements to the bus network were accelerated and the feasibility of moving to a non-diesel transport fleet for London was examined.  It was not expected that London would meet air pollution standards until 2030 at the earliest.  There is a potential £300m fine for the United Kingdom if the standards  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Committee to consider whether it wishes to issue any press releases in relation to its work.

8.1      The Chairman advised those present that he had been in discussions with the Press Office regarding a press release for the ‘addressing the needs of pedestrians’ item.  He proposed that this should relate to the work of the task group, which the Committee had now decided it wished to establish, and an interest in hearing a broad range of views from stakeholders on this topic.  Members were content with this approach.

Report of the Scrutiny Manager.

9.1      The Committee discussed future topics to be scrutinised at the 13 April 2015 meeting and potential items for the Council year 2015/16.  Members decided that two-way traffic flows and an update on the Westminster Community Infrastructure Levy would remain on the work programme for 13 April.  The Committee decided that water pressure would be included as a future item for consideration.  It was agreed that this item should be scheduled for either the June or September 2015 meetings.   

9.2       RESOLVED:

1.    That the Committee approve the scheduled items for the next meeting of the Committee on 13 April 2015.

2.    That an item on water pressure be included on the work programme for the June or September 2015 meetings.

10.1    There was no additional business for the Committee to consider.