Meeting Minutes: Roman Road Implementation Group
Location: Room 57, Level 5 Anchorage House
Date: 9am, 4th March 2009
Attendees:
Cllr Josh Peck
Lead Member for Resources and Performance
JP
Cllr Marc Francis
Lead Member for Housing and Development
MF
Chris Horton
Town Centre Project Coordinator
CH
Lorna Hughes
Neighbourhood Manager, LAP 5
LH
David Saunders
Head, Markets Services
DS
Bryan Jones
Service Head, Environmental Control
BJ
Cecilia Clarke
Communications Officer
CC
John Chilton
Head of Parking Services
JC
Jonathan Nichols
Development, Design & Conservation Officer
JN
Gavin Dooley
Lap 5 & 6 Director
GD
John Stewart
Parking Development Manager
JS
Neil Crump
Senior Environmental Officer
NC
Apologies
Sue Hinds
Access to Employment Manager
SH
Chris Chubb
Group Manager LETs Teams
CCh
Marissa Hernandez
Planning Policy Officer
MH
Pat Holmes
Business and Investment
PH
Item
Action
1
Introductions and apologies
a) JP asked all attendees to introduce themselves and describe their
role with the Council
b) Previous Meeting Minutes (21st January, 2009)
2
Tesco/Gladstone Place Application Update
a) CH briefed the group as follows:
The Council has been served with a claim for Judicial Review on the
Council's decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment
of the former Safeway supermarket site at Gladstone Place
The claim is based on a technicality relating to the Council's
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion which
deemed that an EIA was not required in support of the planning
application
Officers are fully confident that the Screening Opinion was correct
and are fully confident of defeating any legal challenge
The developer has submitted a new application to demonstrate their
commitment to the redevelopment and to safeguard against the
Judicial Review process causing unnecessary delay to the project.
The developer has submitted a new application to demonstrate their
commitment to the redevelopment and to safeguard against the
Judicial Review process causing unnecessary delay to the project.
There is to be a conference with Counsel on Thursday of this week
(i.e the day after the Roman Road Implementation Group) at which
options for best protecting the Council's position in securing the
regeneration of this site will be discussed. In advance of this
conference it would be premature to discuss the matter in detail.
b) MF expressed concern that he had not been briefed by Development
and Renewal concerning the possibility of JR action being taken
much earlier. He also stated that he had not been informed that a
new application had been submitted and the reasons for this.
c) MF also stated that updates on matters relating to the application
should be provided on a more regular basis, including through the
Roman Road Implementation Group.
3
Shop front Improvement Project
a) CH stated that he and JN had drafted specification criteria, using
documents provided from Hammersmith and Fulham for a similar
shop front improvement scheme. CH stated that this was necessary
because, although LBTH had carried out shop front improvement
projects in the past, the criteria needed to be updated.
b) CH stated that the funding for the project would come from LABGI
(Local Area Business Growth Initiative). In order to ‘ring fence’ this for
the project, a full director’s report was necessary. CH to begin CH
drafting of report.
c) JN informed the group that he has considerable experience in
managing and advising for shop front improvement projects. The
experience of the Brick Lane project had been to lift the burden from
businesses and to raise the whole level of the operation.
d) JP noted that there were two inconsistencies that he had spotted CH/JN
within the criteria relating to the response time frame and the
percentage of costs covered. CH thanked JP for making him aware of
this and confirmed that these would be amended in future drafts.
e) GD stated that the project would help to bolster the shopkeepers
association, providing a reason for attendance and consultation. JN
agreed that briefing and involving the shopkeepers association was
essential to the process. MF also stressed the importance of
consultation with shopkeepers and landlords.
f) JP asked CH when the project would be delivered. CH stated that the
aim was to have the project actively running by June 2009.
4
Shop Local
a) LH informed the group that she had organised initial meetings for the
Shop Local Project which is intended to promote and market the town
centre offer to local residents, working alongside shopkeepers and
market traders. The amount of funding allocated to the project is
£38,000.
b) This funding is sourced from planning gain from a new residential
development on Ordell Road and therefore is aimed within a mile
radius of the development (this radius covers the whole of Roman
Road Town centre).
c) MF wanted to know when delivery would start. CH confirmed that as
the project did not exceed £50,000, the requirement was that at least CH/LH
three candidates submitted cost estimates. As soon as these were
received and a criteria for assessment followed, a consultant could be
appointed.
d) JP stated that he felt particular attention needed to be paid to the
creation of a successful brand identity to engender customer loyalty.
5
Section 106 Project Initiation Document
a) CH informed the group that approximately £158,000 had been
secured in total from the Ordell Road Development for enterprise and
economic development related activities.
Of this, approximately
£38,000 was being used to fund the Shop Local Campaign and a
further £120,000 to support the Roman Road Town Centre Advice,
Support and Training Programme.
b) Whilst the Shop Local project was not required to undergo an official
tender, the Roman Road Town Centre Advice, Support and Training
Programme would now have to be subject to this.
c) In response to JP’s query in relation to how long this would take, CH
stated that he had been informed by the Procurement Department
that on average the tenure process took four months. CH also stated
that the project proposal allows for six months but he hoped to have
the consultant appointed well within this time frame.
6
Street Market Strategy
a) BJ stated that Environmental Services with CLC had commissioned a
Street Market Strategy for the whole borough.
b) The Strategy is to look at current issues as well as recommendations
for the next 15/25 years. It is intended to inform both the Core
Strategy and the Town Centre Strategy. DS stated that his team were
looking to appoint a consultant imminently.
c) MF asked how much the strategy would cost and when it would be
prepared by. BJ responded that it would cost approximately £25,000
and that he hoped that it would be in draft form by the end of June.
d) BJ stated that he would send to JP and MF a scoping for the project.
BJ
7
Farmer’s Market
a) DS informed the group that the farmers market would be located to
Ewart place from Saturday 7th March and that, although he thought
this would prove to be beneficial to the town centre, there may be
DS
issues in the short term in relation to van access, etc. DS to report
back to the group at next Roman Road Implementation Group.
b) He also stated that the Art Market would remain in its current location
of Gladstone Place.
c) MF asked whether or not the farmers’ market would be fortnightly
from this Saturday. DS stated that this was something to consider
when it becomes more established in its new location. MF asked if it
was possible to promote it more effectively and whether this could be
in place by the beginning of April, including the use of a banner.
d) CC stated that she would look to identify a budget for this and seek to
action better promotion alongside the Markets Team. DS to consult
CC
further with CC.
8
Parking Changes
a) JC that parking services had previously allocated 51 parking bays for
use by market traders in order to minimise parking congestion on
market days. However, due to under use of the bays by market
traders, this policy was now being revised.
b) MF stated that he felt that taking 51 spaces from local residents was
excessive and that these changes had not been ill thought out,
particularly in relation to Tuesday and Thursday market days. JP
agreed that there was considerable under use of the market trader
bays and there was a need to revisit the scheme in order to identify
the number of traders that needed by traders.
c) GD stated that there would remain a need to prevent the market
traders from congesting the market with their vans. MF stated that he
did not feel that residents had been adequately consulted and that
there was the need to have the uncertainty resolved within the next
two weeks. JP stated that 51 spaces may have been a
disproportionate number but that there would remain a need for
market trader parking.
d) JP stated that there should be a report provided to the group in
relation to the revised approach in time for the next Roman Road JS/JC/BJ
Implementation Group Meeting
9
AOB
a) MF asked what progress had been made in relation to setting up a
meeting with representatives of Iceland in advance of their location to
Roman Road. GD stated that no meeting had taken place with
Iceland as yet but that he had been in discussion with Sue Hinds on
the matter and that Skills Match were to be involved in providing staff
GD
for the new store. GD to re-contact Iceland with regard to a meeting
and to communicate progress to MF.
b) DS stated that a resident had asked him to raise the issue of empty GD/SH
properties. CH informed him that this was an important issue and that
would ask Jonathan Arnold to brief on this for the next meeting. JP
also felt this issue needed to be given a higher profile.
c) JP asked that Chris Chubb attend the next meeting to feedback to the
group on the points raised in the minutes for the previous meeting of CH
4th March.
12
To be arranged