Issue - meetings
A12 Acoustic Barrier - Part of the A12 Green Mile Initiative
Meeting: 27/09/2018 - Grants Determination (Cabinet) Sub-Committee (Item 6)
6 A12 Acoustic Barrier - Part of the A12 Green Mile Initiative PDF 3 MB
Additional documents:
- A12 Acoustic Barrier PID 180705 final, item 6 PDF 3 MB
- A12 acoustic barrier report - response to Grant Scrutiny Comments, item 6 PDF 86 KB
Decision:
The Sub-Committee considered the report relating to the design and installation of a new innovative acoustic barrier for a section of the A12 to primarily mitigate noise pollution. This was a pilot scheme in partnership with Transport for London (TfL) and Poplar HARCA. The project formed part of a wider programme projects to mitigate noise and pollution along the A12 including the provision of a pocket parks.
The GSSC had asked a number of questions about the merits of the barrier in terms of improving air quality, whether alternative options had been explored; the design of the barrier, value for money of the project and the use of s106 funding for the project. They also asked questions about the location of the barrier and the possibility of an in house solution to minimise costs. The GSSC felt that they could not endorse the project due to the above issues and asked that the funding be halted if possible. Officers had provided and circulated a written response to these questions, and the responses were noted as set out in the supplementary agenda.
The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. Members sought clarity about whether the barrier would help tackle air pollution or only noise pollution. It was also questioned if other options such as the use of a green wall had been looked at. Officers responded that the barrier should help reduce air pollution, although due to its size, the benefits would be marginal. Air pollution would still be able to travel around the barrier.
Given the above issues and the comments of the GSSC, the Sub – Committee requested to receive more information on the proposal, including the possibility of providing a green wall and alternative locations for the barrier.
DECISION
1 That the decision to approve the provision of £100,000 to Poplar HARCA as a grant to deliver the A12 acoustic barrier project be DEFERRED pending a further review.
Minutes:
The Sub-Committee considered the report relating to the design and installation of a new innovative acoustic barrier for a section of the A12 to primarily mitigate noise pollution. This was a pilot scheme in partnership with Transport for London (TfL) and Poplar HARCA. The project formed part of a wider programme projects to mitigate noise and pollution along the A12 including the provision of a pocket parks.
The GSSC had asked a number of questions about the merits of the barrier in terms of improving air quality, whether alternative options had been explored; the design of the barrier, value for money of the project and the use of s106 funding for the project. They also asked questions about the location of the barrier and the possibility of an in house solution to minimise costs. The GSSC felt that they could not endorse the project due to the above issues and asked that the funding be halted if possible. Officers had provided and circulated a written response to these questions, and the responses were noted as set out in the supplementary agenda.
The Mayor then invited GDSC Members to comment on the report. Members sought clarity about whether the barrier would help tackle air pollution or only noise pollution. It was also questioned if other options such as the use of a green wall had been looked at. Officers responded that the barrier should help reduce air pollution, although due to its size, the benefits would be marginal. Air pollution would still be able to travel around the barrier.
Given the above issues and the comments of the GSSC, the Sub – Committee requested to receive more information on the proposal, including the possibility of providing a green wall and alternative locations for the barrier.
RESOLVED
1 That the decision to approve the provision of £100,000 to Poplar HARCA as a grant to deliver the A12 acoustic barrier project be DEFERRED pending a further review.
Meeting: 20/09/2018 - Grants Scrutiny Sub-Committee (Item 5)
5 A12 Acoustic Barrier - Part of the A12 Green Mile Initiative PDF 3 MB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Abdul Khan, Service Manager for Energy and Sustainability introduced this report and stated the A12 Acoustic Barrier project was seeking £100,000 to award Poplar HARCA as a grant. Poplar HARCA would project manage the design and installation of a new innovative acoustic barrier for a section of the A12 to mitigate noise and air pollution. He said this was a pilot scheme in partnership with Transport for London and Poplar HARCA.
Members of the Sub-Committee asked questions in relation to the report and noted the following:
· The emphasis of the report was on improving air quality however Members of the Sub-Committee felt this was misleading, particularly as the design and materials to be used were untested and there was no evidence it would improve air pollution.
· Members asked if alternative options had been considered to reduce air pollution such as green walls and planting on rooftops. Some Members believed the design of the acoustic barrier was ugly and aesthetically would not enhance the area.
· The Sub-Committee were concerned about the value for money of this project, especially considering the cost per length.
· Some Members were concerned about the council’s use of section 106 funding for projects that are not in the immediate area of the development – in this case, London City Island.
· Members questioned whether the proposed siting of the acoustic barrier was appropriate, considering the density of housing in the locality and therefore a relatively small number of residents benefitting. The Sub-committee felt that there are other sites where noise reduction solutions may benefit more residents.
· The Sub-Committee had reservations about using Poplar HARCA to manage the project as this may not be as cost effective as an in-house solution. The Sub- Committee wanted assurances that a value for money exercise for project management had been undertaken.
The Sub-Committee felt that they COULD NOT ENDORSE this project for the reasons outlined above. They asked for the project to be halted unless funding was already committed.