Case ref: 0700965/Ful and 136/L/S106D
In introducing the report, officers advised that further representations had been received from South Bank Employers Group (SBEG). The Chief Executive of SBEG addressed the meeting and was appreciative of the opportunity to attend a demonstration of the lighting proposals and also opportunities for further engagement with residents/stakeholders. In respect of the officer recommendations, SBEG made the following observations:
Supported in principle and suggestion that Network Rail be approached regarding pigeon proofing works.
Feature lighting proposals supported in principle but of the view that feature lighting is an alternative to cleaning and painting of the structure and that other elements of the tunnel upgrade are a higher priority for expenditure.
Supported subject to input of the Lower Marsh/Westminster Bridge Road Regeneration Scheme Steering Group.
Concerned about lack of reference to the treatment of pavements, which should be addressed by the Lower Marsh/WBR design team.
Alternative Recommendation proposed
Proceed urgently with
cleaning the walls, applying anti-graffiti coatings and installing
new functional lighting. This will make an immediate and marked
difference to the route from the new hotel to Lower Marsh without
prejudging the best solutions for the more complex and interacting
areas of the project.
Ask the Lower
Marsh/WBR design team to come up with proposals at the earliest
opportunity for the pavements – pavement improvements can
then be implemented as soon as possible and deliver a further short
Instruct officers to
approach Network Rail to fulfil its obligations on pigeon proofing
over the footways.
4. Ask the Lower Marsh/Westminster Bridge Road Regeneration Scheme Steering Group and the selected Design Team to address as soon as possible the best mix of approaches for feature lighting, structural cleaning and painting, artwork or other wall treatments, mitigating the impact of the taxi junction etc. In doing this the Committee could issue general guidance on particular concerns of members (eg the cab route junction, and the best possible treatment of the walls), without getting into specific design issues.
The Committee was supportive of the proposals put forward by SBEG and was keen to improve the very poor pedestrian environment. Advice was sought on scope for narrowing service roads and widening pavements. There were mixed views on the merits of painting the viaduct and it was suggested that the need to treat the paintwork should be reviewed once the impact of the new lighting had been assessed. This would give a clear indication of what other treatments such as cleaning/painting were necessary. The Committee was supportive of approaching Network Rail to fund pigeon proofing works.
That works proceed as
soon as possible to clean the walls, applying anti-graffiti
coatings and install new functional lighting.
That the Lower
Marsh/Westminster Bridge Road design team draw up proposals
for possible pavement improvements (from the
new hotel to the junction of Westminster Bridge Road with Lower
That Senior Council
officers approach Network Rail to fulfil its obligations on pigeon
proofing over the footways and that SBEG be involved in any
discussions on pigeon proofing.
4. That the Lower Marsh/Westminster Bridge Road Regeneration Scheme Steering Group and the selected Design Team consider the best mix of feature lighting, structural cleaning and painting, artwork or other wall treatments to mitigate the impact of the taxi junction etc.