DOCSLIB.ORG

This Council Believes the Labour London Mayor's Proposed 'Freeze

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
This Council Believes the Labour London Mayor's Proposed 'Freeze Council 25 January 2017 Council Motions Wards: All Report Authorised by: Strategic Director Corporate Resources: Jackie Belton Contact for enquiries: [email protected] Wayne Chandai, Democratic Services Manager, 020 7926 0029 Report summary Motions and amendments submitted by Councillors, in accordance with Standing Order 13, are set out below. Motion one and two will be debated per the council’s standing orders. Key to shading: Bold – additions Strikethrough – deletions Motion 1: Conservative Travel fares This council believes the Labour London Mayor’s proposed ‘freeze on fares’ was misleading and did not make clear that the freeze on public transport would only apply to single journeys. In an Evening Standard article on 4th January 2016 Sadiq Khan stated: ''There’ll be a cash freeze across all Transport for London fares for the full four years of my mayoral term of office. You won’t pay a penny more in 2020 than you do now.' The Council believes this is unfair on the many thousands of Lambeth residents who use Oyster cards, Travelcards or pay-as-you-go caps on contactless cards who will not benefit and believed his broken promise. Motion 2: Labour Business rates campaign “This council notes Lambeth’s strong track record of encouraging small businesses in our borough, providing jobs and economic opportunities to residents from all backgrounds. This council further notes the appalling likely impact that the government’s proposed business rate changes will have on hundreds of small businesses, with some facing rises of as much as 43% from 1 April 2017. The average rise is likely to be around 35% for those seriously affected. Although local authorities like Lambeth must collect business rates, the majority of the collected revenue goes to central government with the redistribution mechanism meaning Lambeth will see no extra investment despite the large projected increases for local businesses. Council further notes that Lambeth’s Business Improvement Districts, as well as hundreds of small businesses and local residents have expressed concern about these unfair rises. This council therefore resolves to: Stand up for small businesses by campaigning against these changes. Welcomes the letter from the Leader of the council to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government calling for measures to allow businesses to cope with any rates rise. Further supports the proposal that a phasing plan or more appropriate transitional relief be put in place to help those affected, and for ministers to carry out a longer term review of the effectiveness of business rates as a method of taxation. Urge all residents to sign the council’s petition supporting our small businesses in their lobbying against these changes. Amendment 1: Councillor Scott Ainslie “This council notes Lambeth’s strong track record of encouraging small businesses in our borough, providing jobs and economic opportunities to residents from all backgrounds. This council further notes the appalling likely impact that the government’s proposed business rate changes will have on hundreds of small businesses, with some facing rises of as much as 43% from 1 April 2017. The average rise is likely to be around 35% for those seriously affected. Although local authorities like Lambeth must collect business rates, the majority of the collected revenue goes to central government with the redistribution mechanism meaning Lambeth will see no extra investment despite the large projected increases for local businesses. Council further notes that Lambeth’s Business Improvement Districts, as well as hundreds of small businesses and local residents have expressed concern about these unfair rises. This council therefore resolves to: Stand up for small businesses by campaigning against these changes. Welcomes the letter from the Leader of the council to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government calling for measures to allow businesses to cope with any rates rise. Further supports the proposal that a phasing plan or more appropriate transitional relief be put in place to help those affected, and for ministers to carry out a longer term review of the effectiveness of business rates as a method of taxation. Urge all residents to sign the council’s petition supporting our small businesses in their lobbying against these changes. Council commits to procuring its goods/services from local small businesses wherever possible Motion 3: Greens Streatham transport links Council notes that at the first public meeting after the council election to discuss bringing the Crossrail 2 route to Streatham, held on the 2nd July 2014, Streatham residents voted overwhelmingly that the campaign to improve transport links for Streatham should proceed on a cross party basis. Council believes that a Crossrail 2 station in Streatham would help tackle congestion and pollution on local roads - including the dangerous A23 – and improve the quality of life for local residents. Council notes that at the public meeting on 29th June 2016, attended by senior local politicians from different parties and Council officers, it was highlighted how the decision not to bring Crossrail 2 through Streatham was based on outdated evidence. Council notes the resolve of the meeting to ask the Mayor of London and Secretary of State for Transport to do a proper, up-to-date assessment of the transport needs of Streatham. Council notes that Green London Assembly member, Caroline Russell tabled a Mayor’s question on Wednesday 14th September 2016, asking for all modeling work relating to the assessment of Streatham’s transport needs be made available to Streatham Action’s Transport Group and Lambeth Council, so comparisons could be made with up to date data. Council notes that the Mayor asked TfL to forward the findings of the analysis. This data has still not been made available. Council further notes that at the Overview & Scrutiny meeting on 18th November 2016, it was highlighted that in Lambeth's draft Long Term Transport Strategy (LTTS) none of the five site visits undertaken in the Mott MacDonald-commissioned report ventured South of Brixton. Council Resolves to: Ensure that Streatham is added to Lambeth’s Long Term Transport Strategy (LTTS) as soon as possible. Release to all Streatham Cllrs the evidence which shows what lobbying LB Lambeth has done to make the business case for CR2 to come through Streatham Lobby the deputy mayor for transport and the London Mayor to make the business case for Crossrail 2 to come though Streatham Lobby the Department for Transport to make the case for CR2 to come through Streatham Amendment 1: Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite Council notes that at the first public meeting after the council election to discuss bringing the Crossrail 2 route to Streatham, held on the 2nd July 2014, Streatham residents voted overwhelmingly that the campaign to improve transport links for Streatham should proceed on a cross party basis. Notes that improving the transport network throughout the borough, with a particular focus on Streatham, has been a key council priority for the last few years. Notes that the Council has lobbied Government, the Mayor of London and Transport for London repeatedly for the takeover of Southern’s rail franchise by TfL, bringing Crossrail 2 to Streatham, improvements to cycleways in the local area, better pedestrian crossings on the A23 and for a clean bus corridor through Streatham and Brixton. Council believes that a Crossrail 2 station in Streatham would help tackle congestion and pollution on local roads - including the dangerous A23 – and improve the quality of life for local residents. Council notes that at the public meeting on 29th June 2016, attended by senior local politicians from different parties and Council officers, it was highlighted how the decision not to bring Crossrail 2 through Streatham was based on outdated evidence. Council notes the resolve of the meeting to ask the Mayor of London and Secretary of State for Transport to do a proper, up-to-date assessment of the transport needs of Streatham. Council notes that Green London Assembly member, Caroline Russell tabled a Mayor’s question on Wednesday 14th September 2016, asking for all modeling work relating to the assessment of Streatham’s transport needs be made available to Streatham Action’s Transport Group and Lambeth Council, so comparisons could be made with up to date data. Council notes that the Mayor asked TfL to forward the findings of the analysis. This data has still not been made available. Council further notes that Streatham forms a key part of Lambeth’s draft Long Term Transport Strategy that at the Overview & Scrutiny meeting on 18th November 2016, it was highlighted that in Lambeth's draft Long Term Transport Strategy (LTTS) none of the five site visits undertaken in the Mott MacDonald-commissioned report ventured South of Brixton. Council Resolves to: Continue to lobby for transport improvements for Streatham Ensure that Streatham is added to Lambeth’s Long Term Transport Strategy (LTTS) as soon as possible. Release to all Streatham Cllrs the evidence which shows what lobbying LB Lambeth has done to make the business case for CR2 to come through Streatham Continue to lobby the deputy mayor for transport and the London Mayor to make the business case for Crossrail 2 to come though Streatham Continue to lobby the Department for Transport to make the case for CR2 to come through Streatham Motion 4: Labour Govia Thameslink railways Council notes the motion passed at October’s council meeting about the failures of Govia Thameslink railways and the Southern Rail franchise to provide an adequate service to Lambeth residents, and the further decline in standards that passengers have suffered in recent months. Lambeth's scrutiny committee reviewed the issue in November and found clear failings in how this vital part of the borough's transport infrastructure was performing.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning Applications Committee
    PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE Date: Tuesday 25 May 2021 Time: 7.00 pm Venue: Committee Room (B6) - Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton, London, SW2 1RW* *In line with legislation and continuing Covid-19 precautions, Committee Members will attend the meeting in person at Lambeth Town Hall. Officers, visiting Ward Members and members of the public are invited to attend virtually. Further instructions about joining the meeting, are provided overleaf. Copies of agendas, reports, minutes and other attachments for the Council’s meetings are available on the Lambeth website. www.lambeth.gov.uk/moderngov Members of the Committee Councillor Scarlett O'Hara (Vice-Chair), Councillor Malcolm Clark, Councillor Jessica Leigh, Councillor Mohammed Seedat, Councillor Iain Simpson, Councillor Joanne Simpson (Chair) and Councillor Becca Thackray Substitute Members Councillor Liz Atkins, Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite, Councillor Marcia Cameron, Councillor Rezina Chowdhury, Councillor Paul Gadsby, Councillor Nigel Haselden, Councillor Maria Kay, Councillor Marianna Masters, Councillor Timothy Windle and Councillor Sonia Winifred Further Information If you require any further information or have any queries please contact: Farah Hussain, Telephone: 020 7926 4201; Email: [email protected] Published on: Thursday 13 May 2021 Queries on reports Please contact report authors prior to the meeting if you have questions on the reports or wish to inspect the background documents used. The contact details of the report author are shown on the front page of each report. @LBLdemocracy on Twitter http://twitter.com/LBLdemocracy or use #Lambeth How to access the meeting In line with legislation, Committee members will attend the meeting in person at Lambeth Town Hall. Due to public health guidance covering health, hygiene and social distancing, officers, visiting Ward Members and members of the public are invited to attend virtually.
    [Show full text]
  • First Agenda Autumn Conference 2020
    First Agenda Autumn Conference 2020 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... 2 Section A .................................................................................................................................... 5 A1 Amendments to Standing Orders for the Conduct of Conference to enable an online and telephone Extraordinary Conference to be held in Autumn 2020 ................................. 5 A2 Enabling Motion for an Extraordinary Autumn Conference 2020 to be held online ....... 7 Section B .................................................................................................................................... 8 B1 Food and Agriculture Voting Paper .................................................................................. 8 Section C................................................................................................................................... 15 C1 Adopt the Principle of Rationing to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Arising from Travel, Amending the Climate Emergency and the Transport Chapters of PSS .................. 15 C2 The 2019 General Election Manifesto and Climate Change Mitigation ......................... 17 C3 Animal Rights: Fireworks; limit use and quiet ................................................................ 19 C4 Updating the philosophical basis to reflect doughnut economics ................................. 20 C5 Car and vans to go zero carbon by
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL AGENDA AUTUMN ONLINE CONFERENCE 2-11 October 2020
    FINAL AGENDA AUTUMN ONLINE CONFERENCE 2-11 October 2020 9 1 CONTENTS Table of Contents 2 Section A (Enabling Motions) 10 Enabling Motions A01 Standing Orders Committee (SOC) Report 10 Enabling Motions A02 Amendments to Standing Orders for the Conduct of Conference 11 to enable an online and telephone Extraordinary Conference to be held in Autumn 2020 Enabling Motions A03 Enabling Motion for an Extraordinary Autumn Conference 2020 12 to be held online Section A – Main Agenda 14 A1 Standing Orders Committee Report 14 A2 Green Party Executive Report 37 A3 Treasurers Report 46 A4 Green Party Regional Council Report 47 A5 Dispute Resolution Committee Report 50 A6 Policy Development Committee Report 54 A7 Complaint Managers Report 57 A8 Campaigns Committee Report 58 A9 Conferences Committee Report 58 A10 Equality and Diversity Committee Report 58 A11 Green World Editorial Board Report 58 A12 Framework Development Group report 58 A13 Climate Emergency Policy Working Group Report 58 Section B 60 B1 Food and Agriculture Voting Paper 60 Amendment 2a 60 Amendment 1a 61 Amendment 2b 61 Amendment 1b 61 Amendment 1c 62 Amendment 1d 62 Amendment 2c 64 2 3 Section C 65 C1 Deforestation (Fast Tracked) 65 C2 Car and vans to go zero carbon by 2030 65 C3 Ban on advertising of high-carbon goods and services 65 C4 The 2019 General Election Manifesto and Climate Change Mitigation 66 Amendment 1 67 Amendment 2 67 C5 Adopt the Principle of Rationing to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Arising from Travel, 67 Amending the Climate Emergency and the Transport Chapters of PSS C6 Updating the philosophical basis to reflect doughnut economics 68 Amendment 1 69 C7 Self Declaration of Gender 69 C8 Animal Rights: Fireworks; limit use and quiet 70 C9 Access to Fertility Treatment 70 Section D 71 D1 Winning over workers is crucial to fighting climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Masks Must Remain Mandatory to Keep Public Safe, Says Green Party
    Greens express profound disappointment over Labour Party failure to support fair voting system 27 September 2021 The Green Party has criticised the Labour leadership for failing to ensure the party backed a vote to support proportional representation at its conference today [Monday 27 September]. [1] Labour conference defeated the motion after it was sent to a card vote. This came after 150 Constituency Labour Parties submitted motions on the topic and more than 83% of members previously said they support the idea. [2] Zack Polanski, Green Party spokesperson on Democracy and Citizen Engagement, said: “This is a really disappointing decision by the Labour Party which shows a real lack of leadership and vision from the top of the party. “Labour members overwhelmingly support electoral reform, yet Keir Starmer has done next to nothing to ensure that his party’s delegates voted through a motion which could have revolutionised British politics and put an end to the Tory stranglehold on our failed democratic system. “In the conference hall, speaker after speaker argued passionately for Labour to adopt proportional representation in its next manifesto, yet it still did not pass. Without proportional representation and electoral cooperation Labour has an impossible mountain to climb and the country faces another five years of chaos with the Conservatives. “It is clear that British voters want to move on from the failure and division caused by the two-party system, and so it is extremely worrying to see Labour fail to grasp the need for a more cooperative and collaborative form of politics which will benefit everyone.
    [Show full text]
  • General Election Candidate Details
    General Election Candidate Details Barking Margaret Hodge, Lab, [email protected] @margarethodge (the sitting MP) Tamkeen Akhterrasul Shaikh, Con, [email protected] @tamkeenshaikh Ann Haigh, Lib Dem, [email protected] Shannon Butterfield, Green, [email protected] Karen Batley, Brexit Party, [email protected] @BatleyKaren Bermondsey and Old Southwark Neil Coyle, Labour, [email protected] @coyleneil Andrew Baker, Con, [email protected] @agsbaker235 Humaira Ali, Liberal Democrat, [email protected] @cllrhumaira Alex Matthews, Brexit Party, [email protected] @apmmatthews Bethnal Green & Bow Rushanara Ali, Lab, [email protected] @rushanaraali (the sitting MP) Nick Stovold, Con, [email protected] @nick_stovold Josh Babarinde, Lib Dem, [email protected] Shahrar Ali, Green, [email protected] @ShahrarAli David Axe, Brexit Party, [email protected] @DavidAxePPC Camberwell & Peckham Harriet Harman, Lab, [email protected] @HarrietHarman (the sitting MP) Peter Quentin, Con, [email protected] Julia Ogiehor, Lib Dem, [email protected] @juliaogiehor Claire Sheppard, Green, [email protected] @ShinyShep Chingford & Woodford Green Iain Duncan-Smith, Con, [email protected] (the sitting MP) Lab, Faiza Shaeen, [email protected] @faizashaheen Geoffrey Seef, Lib Dem, [email protected] @GSeeff Dagenham & Rainham Jon Cruddas, Lab, [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court, Lawyer Letter
    Lord Reed President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Parliament Square London SW1P 3BD [email protected] Cc Rt Hon Alok Sharma MP, President COP26 Rt Hon Michael Ellis QC MP, Attorney General Mr. Tim Crosland, Director, Plan B.Earth Re. Humanity’s Lifeline: the Paris Agreement Temperature Limit March 30, 2021 Dear Lord Reed: We write concerning the Supreme Court’s decision last December, which ruled that the Government’s policy in support of Heathrow expansion was lawful, despite the Government’s failure to take into account the Paris Agreement’s agreed temperature limits which constitute a key part of its architecture.1 There was uncontested evidence before the Court that: ● The expansion of Heathrow Airport would lead to around 40,000,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions from UK aviation by 20502; ● That in order to meet the Paris Temperature Limit (ie 1.5˚C and “well below” 2˚C), carbon dioxide emissions would need to be “net zero” before 20503; and that ● Breaching the Temperature Limits prescribed in the goals of the Paris Agreement would have dire implications for humanity, in particular for the younger generation and the Global South. The Government did not explain how the expansion of Heathrow Airport could be reconciled with the goals agreed in Paris by every country in the world. To the contrary, it argued that the Paris Agreement was “not relevant”4. Chris Grayling MP, the Transport Minister at the time, relied instead on the historic 2˚C temperature limit, rejected by governments (including the UK 1 See R (on the application of Friends of the Earth Ltd and others) (Respondents) v Heathrow Airport Ltd (Appellant) [2020] UKSC 52 2 See https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/878705 /uk-aviation-forecasts-2017.pdf, p.107, Table 36 3 See Court of Appeal judgement, para.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Elections of May 2019
    The European Elections of May 2019 Electoral systems and outcomes STUDY EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Kai Friederike Oelbermann and Friedrich Pukelsheim PE 652.037 – July 2020 EN The European Elections of May 2019 Electoral systems and outcomes This EPRS study provides an overview of the electoral systems and outcomes in the May 2019 elections to the European Parliament. It analyses the procedural details of how parties and candidates register their participation, how votes are cast, how valid votes are converted into seats, and how seats are assigned to candidates. For each Member State the paper describes the ballot structure and vote pattern used, the apportionment of seats among the Member State’s domestic parties, and the assignment of the seats of a party to its candidates. It highlights aspects that are common to all Member States and captures peculiarities that are specific to some domestic provisions. EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service AUTHOR(S) This study has been written by Kai-Friederike Oelbermann (Anhalt University of Applied Sciences) and Friedrich Pukelsheim (University of Augsburg) at the request of the Members’ Research Service, within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. The authors acknowledge the useful comments made by Wilhelm Lehmann (European Parliament/European University Institute) on drafts of this paper. PUBLISHER Members' Research Service, Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) To contact the publisher, please e-mail [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Manuscript finalised in June 2020. DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work.
    [Show full text]
  • Streatham High Road Consultation Report 2018
    Proposed changes to parking and loadingProposed bays changes northbound to parking on Streatham and Highloading Road bays between northbound Becmead on StreathamAvenue andRoad Drewstead between BecmeadRoad Avenue Consultationand Drewstead Report Road FebruaryConsultation 2018 Report February 2018 1 Contents Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 3 1. About the proposals ............................................................................................ 5 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Detailed description ........................................................................................ 5 2. About the consultation ........................................................................................ 7 2.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Potential outcomes ......................................................................................... 7 2.3 Who we consulted .......................................................................................... 7 2.4 Dates and duration ......................................................................................... 8 2.5 What we asked ............................................................................................... 8 2.6 Methods of responding ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Printed Minutes PDF 279 KB
    COUNCIL Wednesday 18 October 2017 at 7.00 pm MINUTES The Worshipful the Mayor in the Chair COUNCILLORS PRESENT: Councillor Scott Ainslie, Councillor Adedamola Aminu, Councillor David Amos, Councillor Donatus Anyanwu, Councillor Liz Atkins, Councillor Mary Atkins, Councillor Matthew Bennett, Councillor Alex Bigham, Councillor Anna Birley, Councillor Jennifer Brathwaite, Councillor Linda Bray, Councillor Tim Briggs, Mayor Marcia Cameron, Councillor Rezina Chowdhury, Councillor Malcolm Clark, Councillor Fred Cowell, Councillor Kevin Craig, Councillor Edward Davie, Councillor Jim Dickson, Councillor Max Deckers Dowber, Councillor Jacqui Dyer, Councillor Paul Gadsby, Councillor Annie Gallop, Councillor Adrian Garden, Councillor Nigel Haselden, Councillor Rachel Heywood, Councillor Robert Hill, Councillor Jack Holborn, Councillor Claire Holland, Councillor Saleha Jaffer, Councillor John Kazantzis, Councillor Ben Kind, Councillor Paul McGlone, Councillor Jackie Meldrum, Councillor Diana Morris, Councillor Luke Murphy, Councillor Louise Nathanson, Councillor Matt Parr, Councillor Lib Peck, Councillor Sally Prentice, Deputy Mayor Guilherme Rosa, Councillor Neil Sabharwal, Councillor Mohammed Seedat, Councillor Iain Simpson, Councillor Martin Tiedemann, Councillor Amélie Treppass, Councillor Imogen Walker, Councillor Clair Wilcox, Councillor Andrew Wilson and Councillor Sonia Winifred APOLOGIES: Councillor Danial Adilypour, Councillor Michelle Agdomar, Councillor Marsha de Cordova, Councillor Jane Edbrooke, Councillor Florence Eshalomi, Councillor
    [Show full text]
  • Declaration of Result of Poll
    London Borough of Lambeth Election of 3 Ward Councillors Bishops Ward Declaration of Result of Poll Date of Election: 22 May 2014 I, Derrick Anderson, Returning Officer, hereby give notice that the number of votes for each Candidate at the election of 3 Councillors for Bishops Ward are as follows: Number of Votes. Candidate name Description of candidate If Elected the Word 'ELECTED' appears against the number of votes BRAITHWAITE Diana Elma Liberal Democrats 949 BRIGHTBART Sam The Green Party 304 CRAIG Kevin Labour Party Candidate 1061 ELECTED CROFT Clive Murray The Green Party 295 FROST David Alan Conservative Party Candidate 292 GORISSEN Bart The Green Party 272 HANNEY Matthew Thomas Liberal Democrats 777 HARRISON Edward Jon Conservative Party 291 HAYES Andrew Robert UK Independence Party (UKIP) 248 KIND Ben Labour Party Candidate 976 ELECTED MORRIS El Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition 63 MOSLEY Jennie Labour Party Candidate 1106 ELECTED ROTHERHAM Lee Stuart Conservative Party Candidate 284 TRUESDALE Peter Jonathan Liberal Democrats 939 The Number of rejected ballot papers was as follows: Number A - Want of an official mark 0 B - Voting for more than three candidates 0 C – Writing or mark by which voter could be identified 0 D – Unmarked or void for uncertainty 0 E – Rejected in part 0 Total 0 Electorate = 7,586 Total votes received = 2,800 Turnout = 36.91 % And I declare that 1. Jennie Mosley 2. Kevin Craig 3. Ben Kind are duly elected as Members for Bishops Ward. Derrick Anderson, Returning Officer. Printed and published by the Returning Officer, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill, London, SW2 1RW London Borough of Lambeth Election of 3 Ward Councillors Brixton Hill Ward Declaration of Result of Poll Date of Election: 22 May 2014 I, Derrick Anderson, Returning Officer, hereby give notice that the number of votes for each Candidate at the election of 3 Councillors for Brixton Hill Ward are as follows: Number of Votes.
    [Show full text]
  • 142-170 Streatham Hill and Wentworth House in the London Borough of Lambeth Planning Application No.14/06765/VOC
    planning report D&P/1663h/02 6 November 2015 142-170 Streatham Hill and Wentworth House in the London Borough of Lambeth planning application no.14/06765/VOC Strategic planning application stage II referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The proposal Variation of condition 2 of planning permission 14/03760/VOC (which granted the variation of condition 13 of planning permission 10/00507/FUL) to allow for minor material amendments to the permitted scheme, to provide 259 residential units and associated revisions to their layouts, tenure mix and dwelling mix; 1,253sqm retail accommodation (A1/A2/A3); relocation and reconfiguration of theatre (303sqm) and community facility (176sqm); 127 car parking spaces revisions to servicing arrangements; improved energy efficiency; and consequential minor revisions to the external design and massing. The applicant The applicant is London Square and the architect is CJCT. Strategic issues Outstanding issues in relation to mixed use, affordable housing, mix of unit sizes, retail, community infrastructure/theatre, amenity space and landscaping, design, inclusive access, energy and transport have been resolved satisfactorily. The Council’s decision In this instance Lambeth Council has resolved to grant permission. Recommendation That Lambeth Council be advised that the Mayor is content for it to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and does not therefore wish to direct refusal or direct that he is to be the local planning authority. Context 1 On 13 March 2015 the Mayor of London received documents from Lambeth Council notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Sadiq Khan, the Climate Emergency, and the £1Bn Silvertown Road Tunnel
    Sadiq Khan, the Climate Emergency, and the £1bn Silvertown Road Tunnel Silvertown Tunnel protestors with Matthew Pennycook MP for Greenwich and Woolwich at the School Climate Strike on Friday 20 September 2019 Sadiq Khan is silent about his biggest spending commitment as London Mayor, the Silvertown Tunnel. Mayor Khan is now promising a 'Green New Deal' for London - but his administration has just signed a contract to build a massive £1bn new road, that will lock in carbon emissions for decades to come. His decision to build the £1bn Silvertown Tunnel has been kept carefully under the radar – Sadiq never mentions it on social media, for example - and many Londoners still don’t know about it. If this 4-lane Thames road tunnel with dedicated HGV lanes, which effectively doubles the existing Blackwall Tunnel, were planned to run from Battersea to Westminster, things might be different. But it will (if it's ever built) run from Newham in East London to Greenwich. The extra traffic will worsen congestion on the narrow and congested approach roads to the north and south, which run past homes and schools in areas with mostly poorer populations, some of whom already breathe bad air. The decision to sign the contract for Silvertown after declaring a climate emergency, and just before promising a 'Green New Deal' fits into an uncomfortable pattern. Mayor Khan was active supporter of London City Airport expansion, that even the business-minded Mayor Johnson wouldn't permit, and has cancelled walking and cycling schemes such as the Rotherhithe Bridge and the Westway cycleway, claiming that they're unaffordable.
    [Show full text]