DOCSLIB.ORG

Cabinet Minutes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cabinet Minutes CABINET MINUTES Monday 5 July 2021 at 5.00 pm Committee Room (B6) - Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton, London, SW2 1RW Present: Cabinet Member: Portfolio: Councillor Danial Cabinet Member for Sustainable Transport, Environment and Adilypour Clean Air (job-share) Councillor Donatus Cabinet Member for Voluntary Sector and Leisure Anyanwu Councillor Matthew Deputy Leader of the Council (Planning, Investment and New Bennett Homes) Councillor Edward Davie Cabinet Member for Children and Young People Councillor Jim Dickson Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care (job-share) Councillor Jacqui Dyer Deputy Leader of the Council (Jobs, Skills and Community Safety) Councillor Claire Holland Leader of the Council Councillor Andy Wilson Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance Apologies for absence Also present: Also present online: Councillor Maria Kay, Councillor Lucy Caldicott *non-voting 1 Declarations of Pecuniary Interest There were none. 2 Minutes of Previous Meeting RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 15 March 2021 were approved as a correct record of proceedings. 3 Developer Contributions and Neighbourhood CIL Delivery Framework The report was introduced by Deputy Leader (Planning, Investment and New Homes) Councillor Matthew Bennett who highlighted that: The benefits would include the payment of significant developer contributions, comprising community infrastructure levy (CIL) and S106 payments, in addition to increased Council Tax and business rates payments. That the council had proposed new, higher rates of taxes on private development, so that a greater share of growth would be shared across our local communities. Been able to allocate money to support the Council skills strategy and to create better community connections. Cabinet would ensure that all parts of the borough benefited from the contributions. Councillor Nicole Griffiths spoke on behalf of the Green Group and raised concerns in regard to the risk that the CIL and S106 monies would not materialise due to COVID and Brexit. She highlighted that no alternatives or mitigations had been set out in the report. Furthermore, that there was no indication on the repercussions if Capital Revenue streams did not materialise. In response to some of the questions, Officers and the Deputy Leader advised the following: Without the contributions the capital programme would not be delivered and the Council would need to borrow the funding. Need to be clear about what would be coming through the pipeline, and that commercial and residential pipelines were very strong and figures in the report were reflective of that. There was good progress on the Lambeth Local Plan, looking forward for the next 10 years. It was highlighted that the Waterloo development had generated a substantial income and the Council had already received 79 million of the 132 million allocated. Cabinet made the following observations They welcomed this report and that the funding would introduce training opportunities and employment. Wards had seen developments across children and young people, page 20 of the agenda, table 12 indicated that all wards prioritised young people, schools, parks, playgrounds, and active travel. It was welcomed that the funding would provide more homes within the borough and this was highly encouraged to solve homelessness. Streatham had raised £70k of NCIL and the Council had invested £1.5m in the area, Strategic Infrastructure Levy was similar, £380k raised and £3m invested in the area. RESOLVED: 1. To note the projected developer contributions forecast to be received over the next five years including income from S106 agreements, to mitigate the local impacts of development, Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), the majority of which must be spent on infrastructure (build and management), while a proportion (referred to as Neighbourhood CIL or NCIL) can be spent on broader interventions to address the impact of growth. 2. To approve the 4 CLIPs (Co-operative Local Investment Plans) as an articulation of residents’ priorities; and note Lambeth residents’ 10 neighbourhood priorities (as set out in paragraph 2.3), as expressed through analysis of the 4 CLIPs, Residents’ Survey and the adopted SOWN (South Bank and Waterloo Neighbours) Neighbourhood Plan 3. To note the budget allocations, including those that have been made by the Capital Investment Programme agreed by Cabinet in July 2020, such that the Council has allocated funds in accordance with the priorities established by residents. 4. To approve a new delivery framework to respond to the requirement of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and related guidance regarding the engagement in local communities about how NCIL should be invested and reported, as set out in Section 2. 4 Medium Term Financial Strategy 2021/22 to 2025/26 In introducing the report the Cabinet Member for Finance and Investment, Councillor Andy Wilson informed Cabinet if the following We were planning for our financial future in a state of continued uncertainty not only due to the pandemic and Brexit, but with the future of local government finance and the long-term funding pressures of essential services. With the emergence of new variants, the ending of the furlough scheme along with uncertainty about the future of government support and the national management of the pandemic, the impact on the income sources for local government was worrying and uncertain. Council Tax and Business Rates would have to play a greater role in ensuring the council stays on a sustainable financial footing and was able to continue delivering services for its residents. Council Tax had to be increased to fund services and the Covid recovery. In recognition of this reliance upon Council Tax, the council had expanded the support available for residents in financial difficulty so that more people could receive the support they need. The Council had expanded support for vulnerable people who struggle to pay their Council Tax by increasing the scope and funding for our Council Tax Support scheme. The extra £1.5m Hardship Support Grant would support almost 7,000 households eligible for Council Tax Support, with most of those seeing their bill reduced to nil, if they were struggling to meet the costs. The council had also begun consultation to make a permanent adjustment to the Council Tax Support scheme for 2022/23 to protect more residents who find the increase in Council Tax unaffordable. The Covid-19 crisis had a significant financial impact and would continue have a long-term effect on the pressures on expenditure as well as the level of resources available to the council. Lambeth’s financial strategy would be continually developed so that it underpins and supports the delivery of Lambeth’s priorities of supporting the local economy, increasing community resilience, promoting care, independence, and equality, strengthening diversity and delivering inclusion for all the borough’s communities. Councillor Scott Ainslie from the Green Group questioned point 4 of the recommendations set out on page 38 of the agenda, he requested confirmation on whether the £8.5 million overspend was in addition to the £12.1 million. Further queries were raised on the proposals and reasons section of the report which included: Why were Lambeth residents forecasted as the highest unemployed? Point 2.27 figures were inconsistent, there was an £8.5m overspend gap and therefore wanted clarity. Wanted to know how confident the Council was that they would receive the £19.2 million from the government. Temporary accommodation was increasing, was this going up due to estate regenerations. In response to some of the questions raised, Cabinet Member for Finance and Investment, Councillor Andy Wilson and Officer advised that: The overspend of £8.5m was set out in the report. The Council continue to pursue covid spend from central government and had received a large part of it for this financial year. Additional pressues woud need to be managed within the Medium Term Financial Strategy. Council tenants on estates that were being regenerated would retain the same tenancies with the same set rent that they had prior. It was reiterated that the Council would not lose any Council/Social housing as more were being built. Councillor Claire Holland, the Leader of the Council, concluded the item by suggesting that any further questions from the opposition were to be raised after the meeting and stated that she was grateful that the Council was in the position that they were in. RESOLVED: 1. To note the key risks set out in paragraphs 2.10 to 2.54 2. To note the Council’s commitment to delivering the agreed revenue savings planned for 2022/23 (£13.698m) and 2023/24 to 2024/25 (£7.765m), as set out in Table 3. 3. To approve the change to the funding deficit as set out in Table 3 and the consequent amendment to the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy. 4. To note the 2020/21 General Fund, overspend of £8.5m as confirmed in Table 5 paragraph 2.55 5. To note the 2020/21 Housing Revenue Account outturn as confirmed in Table 6 paragraph 2.63 6. To note the capital investment outturn of £117.1m against the 2020/21 budget of £259.3m as detailed in paragraphs 3.1 to 3.2 and Appendix 1. 7. To note the 4-year Capital Investment Programme for the period 2021/22 to 2024/25 as set out in paragraphs 3.5 to 3.7 and summarised in Appendix 2 5 Budget and Performance Report - Q4 2020-21 In introducing the report Councillor Andy Wilson advised that: He was presenting the Tier 2 Priority Service KPIs, and the Quarter 4 financial outturn position of the council. That the impact of Covid on performance could be seen again this quarter as services had been dealing with Covid restrictions whilst managing staffing and capacity issues. Despite the challenges of Covid, improvements in tier 1 indicators had brought all four pillars back to green, demonstrating the positive work that had taken place, specifically within the Children’s services.
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]