Report of: Director Of Secretariat

НазваниеReport of: Director Of Secretariat
Размер0.76 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   21

Subject: Questions to the Mayor

Report number: 5

Report to: London Assembly

Date: 15/11/06

Report of: Director Of Secretariat

London City Airport and Olympics

Question No: 2393 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Did the Olympics bid include a binding commitment to the expansion of London City Airport?

The bid document did not make any commitments to the expansion of London City Airport other than those already agreed prior to the submission of the bid.

London City Airport and CO2 Emissions

Question No: 2394 / 2006

Darren Johnson

What assessment have you made of the increase in carbon dioxide emissions that would result from the expansion of London City Airport?

Following the Government’s Aviation White Paper, London City Airport Limited produced a masterplan setting out development proposals to 2030, and I was consulted on this draft plan. My response invited London City Airport to consider sustainable construction techniques for any new buildings, to evaluate the feasibility of using combined heat and power onsite, the production of a green travel plan and targets for public transport and the offsetting of aviation emissions.Cross River Tram

Question No: 2395 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Will the consultation on the cross river tram make clear the future advantages of a route going through Stockwell, which would allow for a future extension to Streatham, via Clapham South and the South Circular?

TfL, in partnership with the boroughs of Camden, Lambeth, Southwark and Westminster are just embarking on extensive public consultation on route options for Cross River Tram. The purpose of the consultation is to have open dialogue with citizens, businesses and stakeholder groups in the local areas at the earliest opportunity to enable them to have a real say in the development of this scheme.

One of the route options is between Oval and Brixton via Stockwell. The consultation will provide a clear assessment of all route options, including the advantages of the route option through Stockwell.

In the longer term, future extensions could be considered but only when the core scheme has progressed sufficiently and is funded. These are not currently part of the scheme and are not a part of this consultation.Solar Panels

Question No: 2396 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Would the Mayor and the London Climate Change Agency support a venture to establish a co-operative scheme in which householders wishing to install solar panels (or other forms of microgeneration) could come together and benefit from reduced equipment and installation costs?

The primary impact that the LCCA and the GLA Group can make on increasing the market for such technologies is through ‘show by doing’ (ie., implementing such technologies on its own buildings), the London Plan and taking advantage of inward investment opportunities so that these technologies are actually manufactured or assembled in London, which will not only bring down the costs of such technologies but also create jobs and economic development opportunities. 271 Bus Route

Question No: 2397 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Will you consider adopting the proposal put forward by the Highgate Society and supported by ward councillors that the 271 bus stand in Pond Square be removed and the 271 route be extended to the Aylmer Road, Archway Road, Great North Road junction (the Wellington Junction) or to East Finchley tube station? This extension would more than double the existing bus service on North Road/North Hill, and better connect all bus services through Highgate.

TfL has reviewed these suggestions for route 271, following correspondence with the Highgate Society and the London Borough of Camden. Both suggestions would largely duplicate sections of route 143. Introducing a high-frequency double-deck route in addition to the 143 would not represent an effective use of resources, as capacity on the section of highway to East Finchley is currently well-matched to existing demand. Congestion Charge Exemption

Question No: 2398 / 2006

Darren Johnson

What is Transport for London planning to do to combat the use of fraudulent or incorrectly approved LPG (liquid petroleum gas)vehicle applications for the Congestion Charge exemption and will you consider an improved system of vehicle checks from which the eligibility of both the vehicle and system installed to it could be instantly verified?

All LPG (liquid petroleum gas) vehicle applications are subject to verification against the PowerShift Register maintained by the Energy Saving Trust which contains details of all approved vehicle converters. The applicant’s registration and conformity documents, which contain details of the vehicle, system installed and installer, are verified against the register prior to a discount being granted.

Each month details of all vehicles provided with a discount are passed to the Energy Saving Trust for further validation of the supplier’s accreditation. Any vehicles which are identified to have been incorrectly awarded discount status are then removed.

TfL believes this procedure provides adequate checks to guard against approval of fraudulent discount applications.Astoria

Question No: 2399 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Do you support the campaign to save the Astoria as a vital live music venue for London?

I am concerned generally that there may be an erosion of the range and availability of live music venues in the capital. Live music venues are key to some of the most important cultural contributions that London has made over the last fifty years.

There are a number of different issues possibly affecting the Astoria's future and it is extremely important that these are taken separately.

My starting point is that I strongly support efforts to maintain the Astoria and if this proves impossible due the overriding strategic interests of London as a whole my office, Transport for London and the London Development Agency should seek to identify possible alternative venues that could be used in place of the current Astoria building during the period between any closure and provision of a new similar capacity music facility on the site.

I have asked officers at the GLA, TfL and LDA to report to me on this matter.

Closure of Westminster Tube Station

Question No: 2400 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Can you confirm that Westminster Tube Station was closed on 22 October for filming of the new Harry Potter movie? If so, why did Tranport for London consider it acceptable to inconvenience thousands of passengers for reasons that do not relate to the maintenance of improvement of the tube on a weekend when a number of sections of central London tube lines were already closed? Has the fee for the closure of the station received from the movie production company been ring-fenced for improvements to the tube network? Why did the advance publicity for the closure refer to cabling works if this was not the case?

Although Westminster is a major station, it is relatively quiet on Sundays. There are many bus and Tube alternatives nearby, and all alternative routes were operating normally. This meant that relatively few passengers were inconvenienced. LU received very few complaints and there were no problems on the day.

All additional income is used to improve LU service.

For safety reasons, it was not thought appropriate to give information on the filming that was planned at Westminster Station prior to the date. Publicity about the filming would undoubtedly have drawn large crowds, given the high profile of the film series. However, the reference in publicity to ‘cabling works’ was thought inappropriate, and all publicity material was replaced before the station closure took place.Lewisham Gateway

Question No: 2401 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Your Stage 1 response to the Lewisham Gateway proposals states that: “The development includes a combination of culverting, de-culverting, river re-alignment and re-grading. Whilst this is a mixture of positive and negative aspects, it is clear that the opportunity to naturalise the river course has been maximised.” What evidence have you got to conclude that the opportunities to naturalise the river course have been maximised? Given that your Stage 1 letter to London Borough of Lewisham makes clear that there are a number of other significant areas where the application falls short of the requirements of the London Plan, why do you appear to conclude that this aspect of the proposals requires no further scrutiny when there are clear community concerns about the proposed alignment of the road and the restrictions this will place on renaturalising the River Quaggy?

As I state in my initial comments to Lewisham Council this is a complex urban regeneration scheme that needs to balance, sometimes competing, social, environmental and economic objectives. I hope that you will agree with me that the existing urban environment is unacceptably poor for all users. River enhancements are clearly an important element of the proposals, but it is one issue that needs to be balanced with many others. The river enhancements referred to within the main application include the provision of a new urban park and an opportunity for people to access the rivers; rivers which most visitors to Lewisham are currently unaware exists.

As you know my officers recently met with a local community group to discuss the re-naturalisation of the River Quaggy to the east of the site, which lies outside the scope of the main planning application. My officers are continuing to work with all relevant stakeholders to achieve an appropriate balance between highways and river enhancements in this area and therefore careful scrutiny of this is indeed continuing. On the issue of the road alignment you will have seen from my comments to the Council that I am not yet in a position to reach a judgment on the transport impact and officers at Transport for London are currently assessing the modelling work undertaken for the revised ‘low-H’ road layout. All these issues are heavily intertwined. You will understand that I cannot fetter my discretion at this stage until this work has been completed and I can judge the overall planning merits of the scheme. The Big Ask

Question No: 2402 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Does your support for the Big Ask campaign mean that you will be adopting a target of a 3% per year reduction in CO2 emissions in London?Oral answerCO2 Targets

Question No: 2403 / 2006

Darren Johnson

When you acknowledged that London was unlikely to meet its target of a 20% reduction in CO2 by 2010 (MQT 0825/2006), you said this was largely due to changes to the grid mix and national energy policy, which is outside your control. What proportion of your new CO2 targets for 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2025 do you expect to be achieved through changes to the grid mix or national policy, and what proportion will be achieved from actions within London?

I am currently preparing a Climate Change Action Plan which will address all of these questions when it is published in the New Year.Thames Gateway Bridge

Question No: 2404 / 2006

Darren Johnson

Given that you said at a recent press conference that the case for tackling climate change is now so much more urgent than when the GLA was first established and given your welcome actions to make CO2 reductions from transport a priority in London, will you now drop your support for the Thames Gateway Bridge?

My support for the TGB has not changed. The bridge will deliver major accessibility improvements to the area, reducing journey times and provide significant increases in the number of jobs or people that could be reached in a 45-minute journey. It will make the area a more attractive place to locate businesses and houses and so lead to more investment in the area.

The total emissions of pollutants related to vehicle emissions once the bridge is opened is expected to increase by less than 1% across East London. TfL has been working partnership with the local boroughs to implement a comprehensive range of mitigation measures which are set out in the Environmental Statement and the Boroughs Agreement.CO2 Targets

Question No: 2405 / 2006

Darren Johnson

What is the 1990 baseline against which your London Plan CO2 targets will be compared?

The following are the baseline data that have been developed for the Climate Change Action Plan. Comprehensive accurate data for 1990 for London are not available, and we have estimated based on the best methodology and data available.

Sector mT CO2

Domestic 15,817

Commercial 12,655

Industrial 7,060

Aviation 9,900

Transport 9,464

Total 54,896Emissions from GLA Group Buildings

Question No: 2406 / 2006

Darren Johnson

What estimation have you made of the total CO2 emissions from GLA group buildings?

As part of the LCCA work with the Toronto Atmospheric Fund (TAF), including a 6 months secondment of the Director of TAF, a carbon accounting software tool was developed for the GLA Group by the Partners for Climate Protection in Canada and the Councils for Climate Protection in the UK. Carbon accounting takes into account carbon emissions not just from energy but also from water, waste and transport.

The carbon accounting software has been purchased and disseminated to the functional bodies in the GLA Group. It will be used to report on the total emissions arising from GLA Group activities on an annual basis.

CO2 emissions arising from energy consumed by GLA Group buildings in 2005 were:

tCO2 %

TFL 14,682 10.7

MPA 105,894 76.9

LFEPA 15,473 11.2

GLA 1,591 1.2

The above excludes emissions from water, waste and transport and LDA emissions for Devon House, which the LDA has now vacated.

Emissions from Public Transport in London

Question No: 2407 / 2006

Darren Johnson

What proportion of London’s overall CO2 emissions comes from public transport? Can you break this down by mode?

In 2005/06 approximately 4.7 % of London’s CO2 emissions arose from public transport, excluding aviation.

This can be broken down as follows:

Buses: 1.5%

London Underground: 0.95%

Taxis and private hire vehicles: 1.1%

Dial-a-Ride: 0.10%

Docklands Light Railway: 0.04%

London River Services: 0.03%

Croydon Tramlink: 0.01%

National Rail: 0.96%

This compares with 30% from aviation, 30% from domestic energy use, 20% from commercial energy use, 5% from industrial usage and 10% of emissions from private transport.Bus Shelter - Hilly Fields Crescent SE4
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   21


Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconReport of: Director Of Secretariat

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconReport of: Director Of Secretariat

Report of: Director Of Secretariat icon5 Subject: Mayors Question Time Report of: Director of Secretariat 1472 / 2003 Pensioners Travel Pass

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconTitle of report: Planning applications for consideration report of: Derek Quinn, Group Director Development and Enterprise Purpose of the Report

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconTitle of report: Planning applications for consideration report of: Derek Quinn, Group Director Development and Enterprise Purpose of the Report

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconExecutive director/ceo’s monthly report to council and chapter and section officers

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconVous avez répondu à cette annonce dans Echo Hebdo n° 49
«Fundamentals of Acoustics» (M. Bruneau, iste, 2006) disponibles au secrétariat de la sfa. Cette ouvrage, en anglais, est proposé...
Report of: Director Of Secretariat icon01 45 17 15 60 (Secrétariat) 01 45 17 15 58 (Direct) Fax

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconDirector of Community Health Programs and Executive Director of the Association for Community Health Improvement for

Report of: Director Of Secretariat iconRussia Life04tcy/ros/000xx progress Report №2 from 01. 07. 05 to 15. 01. 06 Date of the submission of the report: 20. 01. 06

Разместите кнопку на своём сайте:

База данных защищена авторским правом © 2014
обратиться к администрации
Главная страница