To review progress of the Liveable Streets Programme

The Committee received a presentation on the Liveable Streets programme which is intended to improve the look and feel of public spaces in neighbourhoods across the Borough and aims to make it easier, safer, and more convenient to get around by foot, bike, and public transport. The programme also aims to reduce people making ‘rat runs and shortcuts through residential streets to encourage more sustainable journeys and to improve air quality and road safety.

The Chair welcomed Mayor John Biggs and Councillor Kahar Choudhry Cabinet Lead for Highways and Public Realm here in person today, Ann Sutcliffe Corporate Director for Place and Dan Jones Divisional Director for Public Realm who are joining virtually for attending this evening. However, before the Chair handed over to the Mayor he stated that the Committee would like to know the following (i) which of the schemes have been delivered so far and will continue given the recent announcement on the pausing of the Scheme; (ii) what does the recent announcement on the pausing of the scheme mean; (iii) What were the challenges faced and what does the future of the scheme or any schemes similar to this will look like; (iv) the budget implication on the financial implication to this programme and decision; (v) listening to ward councillors representing the views of their constituents and their own experience.  The main points of the discussion and questions arising may be summarised as follows.

The Committee:

v  Expressed concern regarding the failure of the Councils own Communications Team to support scrutiny in promoting its activities and especially on this item. Also it was noted that whilst a press release had been sent out today there is a need of further support in raising the profile of Scrutiny, both internally and externally as a means to improving the effectiveness of the function.

v  Noted that the Chair had, had to publish a video on his own social media account to increase wider awareness of tonight’s meeting.

v  Noted the concerns that residents had raised in terms of the apparent short notice of this item however the work programme for Overview and Scrutiny had been published in June 2021 and this item was on the was on the list.

v  Noted that (i) an open letter had been received signed by 217 residents highlighting concerns regarding the Liveable Streets Programme; (ii) the Chair had also received a range of e-mails highlighting concerns and questions on the programme which had been shared with Members. The Committee were asked to be mindful of those concerns in tonight’s discussions.

v  Noted on the whole residents are supportive of the Liveable Streets Scheme but many have expressed frustration of the slowness of the implementation

v  Agreed that the Liveable Streets Scheme was always about so much more than closing a few roads and with COP26 (Conference of the Parties) coming up there are concerns especially amongst young people about what is happening across the planet and the impact on our most vulnerable communities both in the UK and worldwide.

v  Recognised that there is an ambition to gently persuade people out of their cars and to stop taking short journeys in vehicles if they are fit and able to make them in another way.

v  Noted that at a Ward Level it has apparently been challenging for councillors to understand what decisions are being made and therefore to share them with residents.

v  Concurred with the view that councillors need to think about what such Schemes mean in terms of the overall permeability of London.

v  Commented that it wanted to know what lessons learned from the consultation on the Scheme for future consultations as it is something that across Tower Hamlets councillors want to see an improvement in because that is how LBTH can best serve its residents.

v  Stated that it wanted to know how LBTH will consider the needs of young children in these schemes.

v  Noted that LBTH did consult with Emergency Services at a statutory level and they indicated they were satisfied with the proposals. However, there may have been issues when a particular ambulance crew using satellite navigation (Sat Nav) to get to a to a call find that they cannot get down a street because their Sat Nav is still directing them down that street although it has been closed to through traffic.

v  Observed that one of the benefits in the pauses in the programme is to consider whether you can have more permeable closures that does allow emergency vehicles to go through and enforced by automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras. The drivers of other motor vehicles passing through would receive a fine.

v  Agreed that we need to make decisions but we need to know if young children are not going to be able to respond to a consultation who speaks up for them (e.g. the Public Health Team).

v  Noted that In terms of the funding the one that's the cause of concern financially is the Brick Lane as if LBTH was to make any significant changes in that area, TfL has indicated it is likely we would not get the funding for that LBTH is discussing with them as part of the review of the Brick Lane scheme.

v  Understood that LBTH did not anticipate that paper responses would be completely overtaken by the number of responses that came in online from people e.g. LBTH have a situation where a multigenerational household receives a paper copy of the consultation document and then sends it back as a single response whereas other people are going online and these are individually counted as responses. The Committee agreed that this is an important issue issue and it is important to get to the to the root of how this is addressed.

v  Agreed that LBTH needs to rebuild that trust with the community and any new consultation methodology needs to go far enough to address the issues especially given the sensitivity of this subject.

v  Accepted the importance of tackling the health impacts of traffic in Tower Hamlets and the environmental degradation of having a Borough where so much of the land area is taken over by vehicles being used on very short journeys and what we can do about that and how we can support people who want to make the shift to more sustainable transport (e.g. promote walking, either with the health benefits or incentives, or improve public transport). In addition, some further thought needs to be needs to take place about what's going to happen with schemes within the Borough (e.g. The implications of the Wapping bus gateway and Old Ford Road at Skew Bridge should be considered together).

v  Agreed one way to encourage more people to use cycling as a mode of transport, LBTH could help residents who do not have anywhere to store their bikes by installing more cycle hangers wherever suitable locations can be identified.

v  Indicated that there is very little information within the presentation to actually scrutinise as whilst it is a very good update about what is happening there is no information really to analyse exactly what has happened so that the Committee can undertake a proper scrutiny spotlight of the Liveable Streets Scheme.

v  Noted that in terms of the measures the impact negatively or positively of the schemes needs to be done over a period of time to make sure that LBTH undertakes a proper analysis in these areas and the way the traffic has been affected (e.g. LBTH have undertaken face-to-face conversation with people and partner agencies regarding most locations and will take on board their comments as part of this whole review of the scheme).

v  Noted that LBTH are currently undertaking a proper analysis which will be brought back at the appropriate time to the Committee.

v  Agreed that if people know what is happening they are much happier therefore LBTH must make more use of the elected members who can take messages out to people in the Borough. Councillors know how to get hold of people in their wards which is an invaluable way to get messages out (e.g. social media such as WhatsApp groups that residents use and councillor can put out messages that are correct)

v  Stated that LBTH need to look at how it can support businesses not just the direct impact of any highways works taking place outside of their shops. Businesses have been squeezed by Covid and now are often having to compete against coffee shops that can expand into the public realm space that LBTH has now created.

v  Agreed that it is important for LBTH to take residents with them over the course of what would be quite a fundamental change to some people's habits and lifestyles and behaviour.

Accordingly, as a result of discussions on Liveable Streets programme Committee agreed that:

1. there should be an investigation on the use of capital for a local Green Transition Fund to support the delivery of the wider agenda as outlined in the Scheme.
2. LBTH should set and publish pollution and traffic reduction targets with particular attention to the safety and health of those under 18.
3. members should (i) investigate the letter from the Chief Executive of the London Ambulance Service; (ii) see a response to that in writing so that the detail of the issues and how they have been addressed can be understood.

4. a mechanism needs to be established  for speedy and transparent response to unforeseen negative impacts when these are brought to the Committees attention by residents and businesses.
5. to establish a reporting facility e.g. through “Love Your Neighbourhood” for persistent speeding because that has come out a lot in communications from residents around this meeting and they need a quick way that they can flag up those hot spots

6. to establish a clearly thought-out policy on resident exemptions so schemes currently being designed can take that into account (e.g. LBTH needs to be clear on what resident exemption actually means).

7. there needs to be an ongoing borough-wide listening platform so outside of specific consultations there is an ongoing way that residents can communicate with LBTH in the coming decades e.g. people can tell LBTH what would help them through the reduction in private car use; businesses can tell LBTH what would help them reduce their road miles; and those residents who actually do need to drive can tell LBTH what they need.
8. the Mayor and Cabinet Member are asked what is going to be done to increase cycle parking provision and to encourage people to make those changes to sustainable transport and to make sure any proposals include enough space for non-standard bikes (e.g. those used by families with young children or people with disabilities as not all bikes look the same).
9. That Bus gate enforcement policy must be consistent across the Borough and a report on this issue brought before the Committee at the earliest opportunity..
10. LBTH needs to look at how it can support businesses during the disruption caused when such schemes are being introduced.