Richard William Tomkins v City of London Corporation
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mrs Justice Lang |
| Judgment Date | 08 December 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 3357 (Admin) |
| Docket Number | Case No: CO/1631/2020 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
[2020] EWHC 3357 (Admin)
Mrs Justice Lang DBE
Case No: CO/1631/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
PLANNING COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
The Claimant appeared in person
Cain Ormondroyd (instructed by Comptroller and City Solicitor) for the Defendant
Hearing dates: 6 & 8 October 2020
Approved Judgment
The Claimant has brought a statutory challenge, pursuant to paragraphs 35 and 36 of Schedule 9 to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (“RTRA 1984”), to the validity of an experimental traffic order (“ETO”), made on 2 March 2020, which restricts motor vehicle traffic along Beech Street, Barbican, London EC2Y 8AD. Only zero emission motor vehicles are permitted to travel along Beech Street, other than for access. All types of motor vehicles are permitted access to the buildings whose vehicle entrances are on Beech Street. The junctions between Beech Street and Golden Lane and Bridgewater Street have also been closed to motor vehicles.
The Claimant is a leaseholder of a flat in Lauderdale Tower in the Barbican estate, where he and his family have resided for many years. The Claimant is a member of the Barbican Association which is the tenants' association for Barbican residents. The Claimant is the Chair of the Lauderdale Tower House Group, which is also a recognised tenants' association, though he brings this claim in a personal capacity. It sends a representative to the Council of the Barbican Association, along with each other House on the estate.
The Defendant (hereinafter “the City”) owns and manages the Barbican estate (hereinafter “the Barbican”). The City is the local authority for the area, and it is the traffic authority under the RTRA 1984 for all roads in the City, other than major strategic routes.
Facts
Beech Street and the impact of the ETO
The Barbican includes a cultural centre, roads and walkways, green spaces, car parks for visitors and residents, a school, and over 2,000 dwellings which the City leases directly to residents. The majority of residents live in apartment blocks, though there are also some houses and maisonettes.
Beech Street is a two-way covered street, about 350 metres in length, which runs under a raised section of the Barbican, and has the appearance of an underpass or tunnel. The vision of the Barbican's architects was to separate people and traffic, and so the residential parts of the estate were built on an elevated podium with vehicles running at street level beneath. Volume IV of the Barbican Estate Listed Building Management Guidelines contains a substantial section on Beech Street describing it as “the principal estate vehicular road” and “an intrinsic part of the Barbican experience”. Beech Street is listed Grade II* in common with the rest of the estate's landscape.
Prior to the ETO and the COVID 19 pandemic, Beech Street was heavily used by through traffic (approximately 9,500 vehicles a day on weekdays), as it forms part of the B100 route. It is also used by pedestrians. When traffic levels were high, it suffered from poor air quality, exacerbated by inadequate ventilation in the tunnel. The ETO has closed Beech Street to through traffic, other than zero-emission vehicles. Objectors have argued that the effect of closing this major route to most vehicles is that the traffic and the problems which it causes will simply be displaced into other streets, including residential streets.
The ETO has closed the junctions between Beech Street and two side roads — Golden Lane and Bridgewater Street — which has created access difficulties for both residents and non-residents in the nearby areas.
Beech Street is the only means of vehicular access to some parts of the Barbican. The entrance to the residents' car parks for two apartment blocks (not Lauderdale Tower) is on Beech Street. The main entrance to Lauderdale Tower for non-resident vehicles (e.g. taxis, delivery vans, service engineers and other visitors) is on Beech Street. Although the ETO permits access for all vehicles to these entrances, those who are unfamiliar with the ETO are now deterred from driving into Beech Street because of the prominent no-entry signs at the entrance to the underpass, and the fact that Google Maps and satellite navigation devices no longer recognise it as open. The Claimant and other residents of Lauderdale Tower have experienced disruption and inconvenience as a result.
The Claimant owns a petrol vehicle (a Ford Fiesta) and leases a car parking space in the underground Lauderdale Tower car park. The main entrance to the car park is in Aldersgate Street, close to the entrance to Beech Street. Previously the Claimant approached it from Beech Street but he can no longer do so. He cannot enter the car park from the northbound carriageway of Aldersgate Street because a central reservation prevents it. Alternative access to the car park is circuitous and difficult.
The City leases allocated car parking spaces to residents. Only a handful of spaces have charging facilities for electric cars. The City has informed residents that it does not have funding for further private charging points in residents' car parks. Therefore a switch to a zero emission vehicle is not practicable for the Claimant as he is not able to charge it when his car is parked in the car park. After the hearing, in a schedule of its proposed amendments to my draft judgment, the City's solicitor commented on the actual and potential availability of charging points elsewhere in the Barbican. The City should have raised these matters at the hearing if they wished to rely upon them. In any event, I consider that the only practicable place for the Claimant to charge an electric car regularly is in the residents' car park for Lauderdale Tower.
The introduction of the ETO
In 2017, the City announced the creation of a cultural zone called Culture Mile, aimed at transforming the City of London into a city of culture as well as a city of commerce. The Culture Mile would be a linear zone connecting the City's existing and proposed cultural assets, such as the Barbican Centre, the Museum of London and a proposed new Centre for Music. By an accident of geography, Beech Street found itself as the main axis or backbone of Culture Mile and therefore the City identified the transformation of the street as a priority.
A report entitled “Beech Street Transformation” was approved by the City's Policy and Resources Committee at its meeting on 7 June 2018. The report set out a “vision” whereby the Barbican Exhibition Halls on the north side of Beech Street would be converted into “retail, cultural and learning” accommodation with frontages onto Beech Street that would “fundamentally change the vibrancy, activity and experience of this street”. To create enough pedestrian space for these new facilities, it would be necessary to eliminate the street's northern carriageway, meaning Beech Street would become one-way. The consequent diversion of traffic, although detrimental to the surrounding area, would improve air quality in Beech Street and help create a more pedestrian-friendly environment.
The Policy and Resources Committee delegated responsibility for implementation of this project to the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee, which is a Sub-Committee of the Planning Committee.
The project proved to be complex. The minutes of the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee on 4 September 2018 meeting show that members were concerned about the length of time it would take to complete, as the target date was 2024.
At a meeting on 22 July 2019, members of the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee decided to adopt an interim scheme, while work continued on the development of a permanent scheme. It was agreed that an ETO would be used as a means of introducing a zero emission scheme, to improve air quality in Beech Street.
The proposed ETO was approved by the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee at its meeting on 3 December 2019. Option 2 was selected which maintained Beech Street as a two-way street and closed Beech Street to all vehicles except (a) zero emission vehicles and (b) vehicles requiring access to premises within Beech Street. It also closed Golden Lane and Bridgewater Street at their junctions with Beech Street.
The officer's report to the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee set out a number of risks attached to the proposal, including impact on journey times, congestion, and the impact on surrounding streets resulting from increased traffic and air pollution.
Under the heading “Next Steps”, the report advised that the ETO was planned to take effect in mid-March 2020. Prior to that, statutory parties would be notified of the proposal, as required by regulation 6 of the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996. Any responses from the statutory parties which raised significant or unexpected concerns would be reported back to Members for decision. The Director of the Built Environment (“the Director”), in consultation with the Chair of the Streets and Walkways Sub-Committee, would decide whether to proceed with the ETO after considering any responses from the statutory parties. Once the ETO came into force, a six month statutory public consultation period would begin and the scheme impacts would be monitored. After 8 to 12 months, a further report with recommendations on making the scheme permanent would be presented.
Under the heading “Scheme design – key points”, the report stated that a “list of exempted vehicles will be established and include residents and emergency vehicles”.
On 12 December 2019, the funding for the proposed ETO was approved by the City's Resource Allocation Sub-Committee.
On 16...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sophia Bouchti v London Borough of Enfield
...23 procedure can be described as a truncated one and it was so described by Lang J in Tomkins v City of London Corporation [2020] EWHC 3357 (Admin) at [115]. It can be described in that way because when it is used the steps which would otherwise be required by regulations 6, 7, and 8 do no......
-
SM (a child, by his father and litigation friend, MZM) v London Borough of Hackney
...of State in fact chose to carry out a consultation.” 110 Fifth, Lang J's decision in Tompkins v. City of London Corporation [2020] EWHC 3357 (Admin), at [91] is also distinguishable on the facts because there the Corporation had consulted residents of the Barbican in the past “on some occa......