Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee

Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee

Date: MONDAY, 14 MAY 2018Time: 2.00 pmVenue: COMMITTEE ROOMS, 2ND FLOOR, WEST WING, GUILDHALL

Members: Deputy John AbsalomMunsur AliDeputy John BennettPeter BennettSir Mark BoleatDeputy David BradshawTijs BroekeThomas ClementiDeputy Kevin EverettAnne FairweatherSophie Anne FernandesAlderman John GarbuttAlderman Sir Roger GiffordCaroline HainesDeputy the Revd Stephen HainesGraeme Harrower

Deputy Tom HoffmanAnn HolmesDeputy Wendy HydeVivienne LittlechildAndrew MayerJeremy MayhewWendy MeadSylvia MoysBarbara NewmanGraham PackhamJohn PetrieJudith PleasanceDeputy Richard ReganDeputy Dr Giles ShilsonJeremy SimonsMark Wheatley

Enquiries: Julie Mayertel. no.: 020 7332 [email protected]

Lunch will be served in Guildhall Club at 1PM

John BarradellTown Clerk and Chief Executive

Public Document Pack

AGENDA

Part 1 - Public Agenda

PLEASE NOTE: Those items which might be approved or noted, without discussion, are marked with a (*).

It is open to any Member to request than an item be ‘unstarred’ and subject to discussion. Members may inform the Town Clerk of this request prior to the meeting, or the Chairman at the start of the meeting.

1. APOLOGIES

2. MEMBERS' DECLARATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN RESPECT OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA

3. MINUTESTo approve the public minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 5 March 2018.

For Decision(Pages 1 - 6)

4. ORDER OF THE COURTMembers are asked to note the Order of the Court of Common Council dated 19 April 2018.


5. ELECTION OF CHAIRMANTo Elect a Chairman in accordance with Standing Order 29.

For Decision6. ELECTION OF DEPUTY CHAIRMAN

To Elect a Deputy Chairman in accordance with Standing Order 30.

For Decision7. APPOINTMENT OF SUB COMMITTEES

Report of the Town Clerk.For Decision

(Pages 9 - 12)

8. GRESHAM MUSIC COLLECTION CONSERVATIONReport of the Town Clerk.

For Information(Pages 13 - 18)

9. FINAL DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS PLAN 2018/19 - OPEN SPACESReport of the Director of Open Spaces.


10. UPDATE ON THE MOMUMENT VISITOR CENTREHead of Tower Bridge and Monument to be heard.

For Information

3

11. INSPIRING LONDON THOUGH CULTURE: REVISION OF CRITERIA AND PROCESSESReport of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director.


12. CITY ARTS INITIATIVE - RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CULTURE, HERITAGE AND LIBRARIES COMMITTEEReport of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director.


13. SPITALFIELDS MUSIC GRANTReport of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director and Chief Grants Officer.


14. LONDON LANDMARKS HALF MARATHON: EVALUATION REPORTReport of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director.


15. MAYFLOWER 2020Head of Cultural and Visitor Development to be heard.

For Information

16. FUNDING FOR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR CITY'S BRIDGES*Report of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection.


17. DECISION TAKEN UNDER URGENCY SINCE THE LAST MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE*Report of the Town Clerk.


18. QUESTIONS ON MATTERS RELATING TO THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE

19. ANY OTHER BUSINESS THE CHAIRMAN CONSIDERS URGENT

20. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

MOTION – That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of the Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

For Decision

Part 2 - Non-public Agenda

21. NON-PUBLIC MINUTESTo approve the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 5 March 2018.


22. LIBRARIES & LMA IT AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT - GATEWAY 7 - OUTCOME REPORTReport of the Director of Community and Children’s Services.


23. ALIGNING THE PRIORITY FUNCTION OF GUILDHALL ART GALLERY AS A SPACE FOR HOSPITALITY WITH ITS PUBLIC GALLERY ROLE;Report of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director – TO FOLLOW

For Decision

24. NON-PUBLIC QUESTIONS ON MATTERS RELATING TO THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE

25. ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT THE CHAIRMAN CONSIDERS URGENT AND WHICH THE COMMITTEE AGREE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHILST THE PUBLIC ARE EXCLUDED

CULTURE, HERITAGE AND LIBRARIES COMMITTEE

Monday, 5 March 2018

Minutes of the meeting of the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee held at Guildhall at 12 noon

Present

Members:Graham Packham (Chairman)Deputy John AbsalomDeputy John BennettPeter BennettDeputy Kevin EverettAnne FairweatherAlderman Sir Roger GiffordDeputy the Revd Stephen HainesGraeme HarrowerDeputy Tom HoffmanAnn HolmesDeputy Jamie Ingham ClarkJeremy MayhewSylvia Moys

Barbara NewmanJudith PleasanceDeputy Richard ReganDeputy Dr Giles ShilsonJeremy SimonsMark WheatleyAlderman John GarbuttDeputy David BradshawTijs BroekeDeputy Michael CassidyAndrew MayerMunsur AliThomas ClementiDeputy Wendy Hyde

In Attendance

Officers:Peter LisleyJulie Mayer

- Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director- Town Clerk’s

Mark Jarvis - Chamberlain's DepartmentSteven Chandler - City Surveyor's DepartmentGeoff Pick - Town Clerk’sAndrew BuckinghamJack Joslin

- Town Clerk’s – Communications- Town Clerk’s – Central Grants Unit

Sara Pink - Town Clerk’sKaren McHughColin Buttery

- Comptroller & City Solicitor's Department- Director of Open Spaces

Elizabeth Scott - Town Clerk'sCarol Boswarthack - Community and Children's Services

1. APOLOGIES Members received apologies from Vivienne Littlechild (Deputy Chairman); Alexander Barr; Caroline Haines and Wendy Mead (Chief Commoner).

Page 1

Agenda Item 3

2. MEMBERS' DECLARATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN RESPECT OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA

Jeremy Simons declared a general non-pecuniary interest in respect of agenda item 7 by virtue of his position as a Trustee of Dr Johnson’s House (City of London Corporation Appointment)

Alderman Sir Roger Gifford declared a general non-pecuniary interest in respect of agenda item 7 by virtue of his position as a Trustee of the City Music Foundation.

3. MINUTES The minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 22nd January 2018 were approved.

4. MINUTES FROM THE BENEFICES SUB COMMITTEE The public minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 12 February 2018 were received.

5. FINAL DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS PLAN 2018/19 - DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES AND TOWN CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (CULTURAL SERVICES) Members considered a joint report of the Director of Community and Children’s and Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director in respect of the final Business Plan for 2018/19 for the above two departments.

During the discussion on the report the following points were noted:

The Town’s Clerk’s section of the Business Plan was more relevant to this Committee than Community and Children’s Services’ which contained only a brief reference to the libraries. The wording of the Corporate Plan outcomes had changed since this report was written and the final report to the Policy and Resources Committee later this month will be amended accordingly.

The Director of Open Spaces is working to align his Department’s Business Plan to the Corporate Plan and their report will be presented to the Open Spaces Grand Committee in April and Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee in May.

The Director of the London Metropolitan Archives (LMA) advised that a number of possibilities were being explored in respect of the relocation project and he was meeting regularly with the City Surveyor. Members noted that any project would require ‘Gateway’ approval by City of London Corporation’s Resource Allocation and Projects Sub Committees and Members would receive a further report after the Summer 2018 recess.

In response to a question, the Head of Barbican and Community Libraries advised that, as libraries were very much at the hub of the local community and enjoyed very good relationships with the various

Page 2

community groups which used their services, their work was relevant to the majority of Community and Children’s Services’ objectives. Furthermore, the Head of Service felt that the Library Service was flourishing under its new position within the Community and Children’s Services Department and was happy to discuss this further with Members, should they have any questions outside of the meeting.

The Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director advised Members that the City Corporation’s potential involvement in the Mayflower 400th Anniversary commemorations was noted in the Business Plan and, if the City Corporation was part of an event, credit would be sought.

Officers had met last week to consider delivery of the Cultural Strategy, which would include the work of the Culture Mile Working Party.

RESOLVED, that – the Final High-level Business Plans for 2018/19 for the Department of Community and Children’s Services and the Town Clerk’s Department (Cultural Services) be approved.

6. TOWN CLERK'S CULTURAL SERVICES BUSINESS PLAN PROGRESS REPORT Members received a report of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director in respect of progress made towards achieving the objectives set out in the Town Clerk’s Department (Cultural Services) Business Plan for 20-17/18.

During the discussion on this report the following points were noted:

The Chamberlain had made an allowance for inflation in the latest budget and the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director would hold this in reserve to address any unexpected adverse variances arising throughout this financial year.

The community engagement programme, working with Artichoke in the Aldgate area, was at outline planning stage and is planned to be a key component of the Women, Work and Power programme of events.

Inviting embassies to contribute to the Tourism Strategy, as discussed in the Members’ Workshop ahead of today’s Committee.

The Chairman asked for a brief report on the cultural aspects of the London Landmarks marathon to be presented to the next Committee.

The City Visitor Trail would roll out before the end of the month.

RESOLVED, that – the report be noted.

Page 3

7. CENTRAL GRANTS PROGRAMME - INSPIRING LONDON THROUGH CULTURE: RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CULTURE, HERITAGE & LIBRARIES COMMITTEE Members considered a report of the Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director in respect of the recommendations for applications received under the Inspiring London through Culture funding stream, as part of the City Corporation Central Grants Programme.

Officers confirmed that all applicants were advised on how to become a volunteer/charity or limited company and were directed to organisations which would be able to assist them. They are also advised as to the kind of grants they would or would not be eligible for.

The application from the Amos Trust was rejected. However, Members expressed their high regard for the past work of the Charity and requested that this feedback be given and a future application, with different content, be encouraged in a later round.

In response to a question about Dr Johnson’s House, Members noted that one of the two programmes for funding was ineligible as it was educational in nature. Therefore, the grant awarded was below the level applied for. The other issue noted was the House’s level of reserves, which are outside of the Charity Commission’s Best Practice Guidelines.

Once Members had taken the decision, as set out below*, a Member, also the City Governor appointed to Dr Johnson House Trust, commented that the majority of the reserves of the House were in fact a legacy designated for curatorial purposes, and that income from reserves provided an important fraction of overall running costs.

RESOLVED, that

1. The Central Grants Programme assessment process and budget be noted.

2. The recommendations as set out in Appendix 2 to the report; i.e.:

a) Amos Trust – rejected.b) City Music Foundation for £7,500c) Dr Johnsons House Trust Ltd for £1,500*d) Fields of Battle, Lands of Peace for £7,500e) Huguenots of Spitalfields for £7,750f) Open City Architecture for £6,000g) Quaker Court TMO for £3,500h) Safer Places for £2,992i) St Botolph, Aldgate for £7,500j) Thames Festival Trust for £7,500k) The De Morgan Foundation for £7,600

Page 4

8. CITY ARTS INITIATIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CULTURE, HERITAGE & LIBRARIES COMMITTEE Members considered a report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services in respect of the City Arts Initiative recommendations.

RESOLVED, that – the shortlist of sculptures for the 2018 programme of Sculpture in the City be approved, noting that the final selection will be made subject to logistics and availability and ratified by the Sculpture in the City Board, on which the Chairman of the Culture, Heritage and Libraries sits.

9. DECISIONS TAKEN UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY OR URGENCY SINCE THE LAST MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE Members received a report of the Town Clerk in respect of the following decision, taken under urgency, since the last meeting of the Committee:

City Arts Initiative (CAI) – ‘Chubby Hearts over London’ – a proposal by Anya Hindmarch, in partnership with the Greater London Authority and Bloomberg. The decision had been taken under urgency as the project was launched on Valentine’s Day 2018, to run to the end of London Fashion week (i.e. 14-20th February) and the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee was not due to meet until 5th March 2018.

RESOLVED, that – the report be noted.

10. QUESTIONS ON MATTERS RELATING TO THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE There were no questions.

11. ANY OTHER BUSINESS THE CHAIRMAN CONSIDERS URGENT The Chairman and Members noted that the Head of Guildhall and City Business Libraries; Sara Pink, would be leaving the City of London Corporation at the end of the month. Members asked for their thanks to Sara to go on record for 6 years’ service to the Committee and City Corporation. The Assistant Town Clerk/Culture Mile Director advised that he was working with his Heads of Service on future management arrangements.

12. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC RESOLVED – That under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

Item No. Paragraph No.

13-17 2&3

13. NON-PUBLIC MINUTES The non-public minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2018 were approved.

Page 5

14. NON-PUBLIC MINUTES OF THE BENEFICES SUB COMMITTEE The non-public minutes of the meeting held on 12 February were approved.

15. ARTIZAN STREET LIBRARY Members received a report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services.

16. NON-PUBLIC QUESTIONS ON MATTERS RELATING TO THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE There were no questions.

17. ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT THE CHAIRMAN CONSIDERS URGENT AND WHICH THE COMMITTEE AGREE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHILST THE PUBLIC ARE EXCLUDED Members noted that Dr Johnson’s House would be hosting a concert by the City Music Foundation on 10th April and Alderman, Sir Roger Gifford agreed to circulate details to Members.

The meeting ended at 12.50pm

Chairman

Contact Officer: Julie Mayertel. no.: 020 7332 [email protected]

Page 6

BOWMAN, Mayor RESOLVED: That the Court of Common Council holden in the Guildhall of the City of London on Thursday 19th April 2018, doth hereby appoint the following Committee until the first meeting of the Court in April, 2019.

CULTURE, HERITAGE & LIBRARIES COMMITTEE

1. ConstitutionA Ward Committee consisting of, two Aldermen nominated by the Court of Aldermen up to 31 Commoners representing each Ward (two representatives for the Wards with six or more Members

regardless of whether the Ward has sides) or Side of Ward the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Guildhall School of Music & Drama (ex-officio) the Chairman of the Barbican Centre Board (ex-officio)

2. Quorum The quorum consists of any nine Members.

3. Membership 2018/19

ALDERMEN

5 Sir Roger Gifford

2 John Garbutt

COMMONERS

8 Barbara Patricia Newman, C.B.E………...…………………………………………………… Aldersgate

6 Jeremy Paul Mayhew……………..…….……………………………………………………… Aldersgate

8 Sylvia Doreen Moys……….……………………………………………………………………. Aldgate

4 Graeme George Harrower……………………………………………………………………... Bassishaw

1 John Petrie.……………………………….………………………………………………..……. Billingsgate

5 Wendy Marylin Hyde, Deputy…………………………..……………………………………… Bishopsgate

2 Andrew Paul Mayer……………………………………..……………………………………… Bishopsgate

6 Dr Giles Robert Evelyn Shilson, Deputy……………………………………………………… Bread Street

3 John Alfred Bennett, Deputy…………………………………………………………………… Broad Street

8 Kevin Malcolm Everett, Deputy….………………………………………………………….…. Candlewick

6 Graham David Packham…………………………………………………………………….…. Castle Baynard

5 Jeremy Lewis Simons………………………………………………………………………..… Castle Baynard

2 Tijs Broeke………………………………………………………………………………...…….. Cheap

1 Sophie Anne Fernandes……………………………………………………………………….. Coleman Street

7 Sir Mark Boleat……………………..……..…………………………………………………….. Cordwainer

6 The Revd. Stephen Decatur Haines, Deputy………………………………………………… Cornhill

8 Vivienne Littlechild, J.P. ……………………………………………………………………….. Cripplegate

2 David John Bradshaw, Deputy………….…………………………..………………………… Cripplegate

6 Mark Raymond Peter Henry Delano Wheatley……………………………………………… Dowgate

4 Ann Holmes……………………………………………………………..………………………. Farringdon Within

3 Richard David Regan, O.B.E., Deputy……………………………………………..………… Farringdon Within

3 John David Absalom, Deputy………………………………………………………………….. Farringdon Without

4 Wendy Mead, O.B.E….……………………………………………………………..…………. Farringdon Without

5 Judith Lindsay Pleasance…………………………………………………..…………..……… Langbourn

2 Thomas Cowley Clementi……………………………………………….…………………….. Lime Street

2 Munsur Ali………………………………………………………………….…………………… Portsoken

2 Caroline Wilma Haines………………………………………………………………………… Queenhithe

3 Anne Helen Fairweather……………….………….…………………………………………… Tower

8 Tom Hoffman, Deputy…………………………………………………………………………. Vintry

Page 7

Agenda Item 4

3 Peter Gordon Bennett……………………………………………………..…………………… Walbrook

Together with one vacancy in place of the Ward of Bridge & Bridge Without, which has not made an appointment this year.

4. Terms of Reference

To be responsible for:-

(a) the City Corporation’s activities and services in the fields of culture, heritage and visitors including the development of relevant strategies and policies, reporting to the Court of Common Council as appropriate;

(b) the management of the City’s libraries and archives, including its functions as a library authority in accordance with the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 and all other powers and provisions relating thereto by providing an effective and efficient library service;

(c) the management of the Guildhall Art Gallery and all the works of art belonging to the City of London Corporation;

(d) the management and maintenance and, where appropriate, furnishing the City Information Centre, the Monument, the Roman Villa and Baths (Lower Thames Street) and the visitor and events elements of Tower Bridge;

(e) matters relating to the City’s obligations for its various benefices;

(f) the upkeep and maintenance of the Lord Mayor’s State Coach, the semi-state coaches, the Sheriffs’ Chariots and State Harness;

(g) cart marking;

(h) the development and implementation of a strategy for the management of Keats House (registered charity no. 1053381) and all of the books and artefacts comprising the Keats collection, in accordance with the relevant documents governing this charitable activity;

(i) the management of Guildhall Library Centenary Fund (registered charity no. 206950);

(j) making recommendations to the Court of Common Council regarding the Cultural Strategy, the Visitor Strategy and other corporate strategies, statements or resolutions relating to any of its functions, following consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee;

(k) responsibility for the production and publication of the official City of London Pocketbook;

(l) appointing such Sub-Committees and/or Consultative Committees as are considered necessary for the better performance of its duties including the following areas:-

Benefices Keats House

(m) to be responsible for grants in relation to the ‘Inspiring London Through Culture’ programme for culture and arts from funds under the Committee’s control.

(n) the appointment of the Directors of Open Spaces, Community and Children’s Services and the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director (in consultation with the Open Spaces and City Gardens, Community and Children’s Services and Establishment Committees).

Page 8

Committee: Date:

Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee 14 May 2018

Subject: Appointment of the Benefices Sub Committee and appointments to the Keats House Consultative Committee 2018/19

Public

Report of: Town Clerk

Report author: Julie Mayer For Decision

Summary

The purpose of this report is to ask the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee to:

a) Appoint the Benefices Sub-Committee, which receives nominations from the whole Court of Common Council, and approve its composition and Terms of Reference; and

b) appoint two of its Members to serve on the Keats House Consultative Committee and approve its composition and Terms of Reference.

Details of the composition and Terms of Reference of the Benefices Sub-committees are set out in Appendix A. Details of the composition and Terms of Reference of the Keats House Consultative Committee and the representatives which the Committee is requested to appoint are set out in Appendix B.

Recommendations The Committee is asked to:

1 Agree the appointment, composition and Terms of Reference of the Benefices Sub-Committee. (Up to 8 Members, with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman as ex-officio)

2. Appoint two representatives to the Keats House Consultative Committee. (With the Chairman an Deputy Chairman as ex-officio) and approve its composition and Terms of Reference.

Main Report1. The purpose of this report is to consider the appointment of the Benefices Sub-

Committee for 2018/19 and to approve its composition and Terms of Reference. In addition, the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee is asked to appoint two of its Members to serve on the Keats House Consultative Committee.

Page 9

Agenda Item 7

Benefices Sub Committee

2. At the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee on 2 March 2015, Members agreed to widen the field of nominees to the Benefices Sub Committee, in order to build a pool of Members who would be able and willing to make a Declaration of Membership*, should the need arise. (Please see Appendix A)

3. This arrangement has worked well and, over the past 3 years, Sub-Committee Members have undertaken at least one visit a year/attendance of a service at each of the City’s Benefices. All Members of the Court have been canvassed for nominations, and the names of those expressing an interest will be circulated before the meeting of the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee on 14th May 2018. The Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee serve as ex-officios:

Keats House Consultative Committee

4. The Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Grand Committee (as ex-officio), together with 2 other Members of this Committee, are usually appointed to serve on the Keats House Consultative Committee. Members are invited to indicate whether they wish to serve. (Please see Appendix B)

Conclusion

Members are asked to note the contents of this report and consider the appointments, compositions and Terms of Reference as set out in the recommendations.

Contact: Julie MayerTown Clerk’s DepartmentTel: 020 7332 3414 Email: [email protected]

Page 10

mailto:[email protected]

APPENDIX A

2. Benefices Sub Committee: Current Membership 9

Up to 8 Members of the Court to be appointed by the Committee - the total membership being 10, including the Chairman and Deputy Chairman as Ex-officio Members).

Meetings in 2017/18 3

2.1 The Chairman of this Sub Committee is elected from amongst its membership. In 2017/18 the Membership comprised:

Chairman of the Grand Committee (Ex-officio)

Deputy Chairman of the Grand Committee (Ex-officio)

1. Andrew McMurtrie – Chairman (2016)

2. Alderman Gregory Jones QC – Deputy Chairman (2016)

3. Lord Mountevans

4. Jamie Ingham Clark

5. Tom Hoffman

6. Ann Holmes

7. James de Sausmarez

8. vacancy

2.2 Terms of Reference:

To consider matters relating to the City’s obligations for its various Benefices.

*The Patronage (Benefices) Measure 1986 and The Patronage (Benefices) Rules 1987, seek to confine the exercise of Church of England Patronage; i.e. the right to present Clergy, to a responsible person who is an actual Communicant Member of the Church of England or of a church in communion with it. On receiving notice of a vacancy, the City of London Corporation, as patron, is required to appoint an individual who is ‘willing and able to make the Declaration of Membership and act as its representative to discharge its functions as registered patron’. In practice, the Chairman of the Sub-Committee, being a person able and willing to make the declaration, is usually appointed as the City of London Corporation’s representative and this practice has worked well.

Page 11

APPENDIX BKeats House Consultative Committee

2 Members to be appointed by the Grand Committee (in addition to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman as ex-officio appointments).

Meetings in 2017/18 2

1.1 The current composition is as follows:

Name Representing

Graham Packham Chairman (Ex-officio)

Vivienne Littlechild Deputy Chairman (Ex-officio)

Graeme Harrower Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee

Jeremy Simons Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee

Karina Dostalova Hampstead Heath, Highgate Wood and Queen’s Park Committee

Bob Hall Keats Foundation

Jim Burge Heath Hurst Road Residents’ Association

Stephen Bobasch Keats Community Library

Vacant South End Green Association

Harriet Cullen Keats-Shelley Memorial Association

Martin Humphery Hampstead Conservation Area Advisory Committee/Heath and Hampstead Society

1.2 Meetings are to be chaired by the Chairman of the Grand Committee who

attends (ex-officio) together with the Deputy Chairman (also ex-officio) and two other Members of the Committee.

Terms of Reference:- To make representations to the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee about any matter which, in the opinion of the Consultative Committee, affects or is likely to affect Keats House.

Page 12

Committee: Date:Gresham (City Side) Committee Finance CommitteeCulture, Heritage & Libraries Committee – for information

4 May 20188 May 201814 May 2018

Subject:Gresham Music Collection Conservation Public

Report of:Town ClerkReport authors:Greg Moore – Principal Members’ Services & Committee ManagerPeter Ross – Principal Librarian, Guildhall Library

For Information

Summary

At the February 2018 meetings of the Gresham (City Side) and Joint Grand Gresham Committees, discussion took place in relation to the Gresham Music Collection, elements of which were considered to be in urgent need of repair or restoration work. This Collection is housed in the Guildhall Library, where it has been held on deposit since 1958.

It was observed that there existed a legal liability on the City Corporation and Worshipful Company of Mercers to maintain the Collection and both Sides were supportive of a feasibility study being undertaken to ascertain the activities and costs associated with restoring and preserving the items within the Collection. This work has now been undertaken and the costs of restoring those items in most immediate need of attention has been identified. This report proposes the allocation of funding required to undertake these works and notes the position in respect of the remainder of the Collection. It also outlines future activities which will be proposed in relation to the long-term conservation of the Collection as a whole.

Recommendation

Members of the Gresham (City Side) Committee are asked to:

approve the approach to restoration works outlined in the report, subject to the concurrence of the Worshipful Company of Mercers and the Joint Grand Gresham Committee;

approve the approach to Finance Committee for an allocation of £18,477 to pay for the immediate works necessary to restore the priority works within the Gresham Music Collection, subject to the concurrence of the Worshipful Company of Mercers and the Joint Grand Gresham Committee; and

note that the total cost of the works is £36,954, with £18,477 to be funded each from the City Corporation and the Worshipful Company of Mercers.

Members of the Finance Committee are asked to approve the allocation of £18,477 from Finance Contingency to pay for the immediate works necessary to restore the priority works within the Gresham Music Collection (noting that the total cost of the works is £36,954, with £18,477 to be funded each from the City Corporation and the Worshipful Company of Mercers).

Page 13

Agenda Item 8

Main Report

Background1. Originally put together by Edward Taylor, who was appointed Gresham Professor

of Music in 1837, the Gresham Music Collection belongs to Gresham College but has been on deposit at Guildhall Library since 1958.

2. In 1959, the City Corporation, in conjunction with The Worshipful Company of Mercers, formally agreed to be the custodian of the Gresham Music Collection, with any costs as deemed necessary to be executed by the Gresham Committee. The details of this agreement concerning the custodianship of the Collection were set out within the 6 January 1959 Agreement between the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of the City of London and the Joint Grand Gresham Committee, appended to this report.

3. The Collection is insured under the City Corporation’s general insurance for library items (see: report to Gresham (City Side) Committee, October 2015). However, elements within the collection have been identified as in urgent need of restoration and repair.

4. To honour this responsibility, the Gresham (City Side) Committee agreed that a feasibility study should be produced by the Principal Librarian, clearly setting out a breakdown including costs of what was immediately necessary (i.e. to save those works/items that required immediate attention to stop them deteriorating beyond repair), and what was desirable (i.e. to return the totality of the Collection into acceptable condition).

The Collection5. The most important single items within the Collection are probably the very early

copy of Thomas Tallis’s Spem in Alium, which is regarded as one of the most important copies of Tallis’s work in existence, and the Purcell Autograph manuscript, which is an anthology of 48 songs, all but the last three in Purcell’s hand.

6. Much of the rest of the collection remains undiscovered, despite it having many significant manuscripts – these make up the majority of those which the Principal Librarian has assessed as needing very urgent attention. They include autograph manuscripts by John Blow (1649–1708), choirmaster at St Paul's Cathedral, and an annotated copy of Handel’s Messiah from which the famous 18th Century soprano Gertrude Mara sang. This volume also has autograph notes by Dr Samuel Arnold (1740 – 1802), who was both a composer and the publisher of the collected works of Handel.

7. An expert, previously commissioned to survey the collection from the point of view of creating a detailed catalogue to international music manuscript cataloguing standards (RISM), wrote the following:

“Regarding the nature of the collection, apart from the gems that are already well-known in the collection (for example the autograph manuscript by Purcell) the examination revealed important provenance information for some of the volumes examined. For example, one volume was found to have been in the possession of the important eighteenth-century collector Thomas Bever (1725-

Page 14

1791) (MS 368). The collection also contains several volumes that bear the same bookplate, forming thus separate sub-collections within the Gresham collection. Recording this information could reveal important information about former owners and the history of the manuscripts before they entered the Library of Gresham College. By including the records in the RISM database such provenance information will reunite important collections dispersed in various libraries in the UK and abroad on one database.

Apart from the strong presence of English composers and manuscripts, the collection also contains several Italian manuscripts, some of which may have been purchased abroad by their first owners in lack of a strong publishing tradition in such countries in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. As well as their musical value such volumes shed important light on aspects of musical taste, and reception history of particular repertoire in Britain. The cataloguing of the collection will therefore shed important light on social history in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century London and Britain before the manuscript volumes entered the Library of Gresham College, as well as provide a useful resource for the study of musical taste and life at the College.”

Restoration and Repair8. Following the February Gresham (City Side) and JGGC meetings, the Principal

Librarian has met with the City Corporation’s Conservation Studio Manager to discuss prioritisation of works and to provide the requested breakdown of costs, both in respect of works that are immediately necessary (i.e. to save those works/items that need immediate attention to stop them deteriorating beyond repair), and which are desirable (i.e. to get the totality of the collection into acceptable condition).

Priority Works9. To save those works which need immediate attention, the Conservation Studio

Manager has detailed the hours required to work on each volume and estimated for materials, boxing, and so on. The total hours add up to nine months’ work for a mid-scale grade D conservator (calculated to include annual leave, sick leave and other contingencies). Costings are as follows:

Salary for a grade D conservator: £34154Materials: £2000Boxes to be made: £800Total costs: £36954

10. Should approvals for the funding of this project be obtained before the end of May, it might prove possible to extend the contract of one of the existing conservator already employed on fixed term contracts and currently working on other projects. This would save the costs of recruitment and the individual would not need to spend the first part of the contract being brought up to speed on systems of working and other induction items. It has bene confirmed that all current postholders have the requisite skills necessary for the Gresham Music project.

11. Should it prove necessary to recruit a wholly new member of staff, the figure shown above would need to increase by a small percentage to allow for recruitment, initial management costs, and so on.

Page 15

(i) Desirable Works12. The costs and level of activity required to get the totality of the collection into

acceptable condition is a much more difficult question to answer. There are more than 700 volumes of history, travel, biography and more from the sixteenth century onwards that formed part of the original Gresham College deposit. On the whole, these have been assessed as being less historically important than the music volumes and, for the most part, in a better condition. The Principal Librarian has confirmed that they could indeed carry out a survey of the remainder of this collection, but this would require some time and he is anxious not to delay the more urgent part of the project whilst this is completed.

(ii) Ongoing Maintenance13. As well as requesting the aforementioned feasibility study, Members also asked

that an assessment be produced of what would be required to maintain the collection on an ongoing basis.

14. The Principal Librarian has suggested that only when stages (i) and (ii) of the restoration project have been completed could he calculate a realistic figure in respect of ongoing costs.

15. However, he is confident that, having completed the necessary work on all the material, the annual costs would be quite low. Once stabilised, stored and consulted in a controlled environment (such as Guildhall Library), there should only be a limited necessity for further significant intervention.

16. It is believed that the serious problems of the Gresham Music Collection were sustained before the collections were deposited at the Library: Guildhall Library has many collections of a similar age and level of use, yet their condition has remained stable with none of the problems across the board that one finds in the Gresham Music Collection.

Proposal17. It is therefore proposed that approval be given to the allocation of £18,477 to

fund the immediate works necessary to restore the priority works within the Gresham Music Collection (£18,477 each from the City Corporation and the Mercers’ Company, totalling £36,954).

18. Once this work is underway, it is suggested that the Principal Librarian be asked to undertake a survey of the rest of the collection to ascertain the costs of restoring the other elements of the Collection, following which, a separate bid for funding can be made.

19. Members previously suggested that future consideration might be given to the more general issue of displaying the Collection in due course, with a reference made to a variety of options such as the London Metropolitan Archives and the new Museum of London. It is proposed that this be considered once restoration works are complete, alongside a proposal relating to the resource requirements associated with ongoing conservation to prevent the Collection falling into disrepair again in future.

Page 16

Conclusion20. Members are therefore asked to approve funding of £18,477 to pay for the

immediate works necessary to restore the priority works within the Gresham Music Collection (noting that a contribution of £18,477 would come from each of the City Corporation and the Mercers’ Company, totalling a spend of £36,954). You are also asked to note that further reports, concerned with the restoration of the remainder of the Collection and arrangements for its future display and care, will be presented in due course.

Contact:Greg MoorePrincipal Members’ Services & Committee ManagerT: 020 7332 1399E: [email protected]

Page 17


This page is intentionally left blank

Page 18

Committee: Date:

Culture, Heritage and Libraries 22 May 2018Subject:Final Departmental Business Plan 2018/19 – Open Spaces

Public

Report of:Colin Buttery – Director, Open SpacesReport author:Gerry Kiefer, Open Spaces

For Decision

Summary

This report presents the final high-level business plan for the Open Spaces Department for 2018/19. The Business Plan identifies three top line objectives with four outcomes sitting under each objective. These objectives and outcomes are pertinent to the whole range of services provided by the Department, including Keats House, Tower Bridge and the Monument. The Plan also shows how the Open Spaces Business Plan helps to deliver the outcomes of the Corporate Plan’s 2018 – 2023 by referencing the Corporate Plan numbered outcomes alongside the Departments outcomes, programmes and projects.

Recommendation

Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee Members are asked to:

approve the Open Spaces Department’s Business Plan 2018 - 19

Main Report

Background1. As part of the new framework for corporate and business planning, departments

were asked to produce standardised high-level, 2-side business plans for the first time in 2017/18. These were presented as drafts to Service Committees in February and as finals for formal approval in May 2017. Members generally welcomed these high-level plans for being brief, concise, focused and consistent statements of the key ambitions and objectives for every department.

2. For 2018/19, departments were again asked to produce high-level plans in draft, which were presented to this Committees in December 2017 alongside the departmental estimate reports, so that draft ambitions could be discussed at the same time as draft budgets. This represented the first step towards integrating budget-setting and priority-setting.

3. Discussions are also taking place on aligning other key corporate processes with business planning, such as workforce planning and risk management. Achieving this will represent a significant step towards the City of London Corporation being

Page 19

Agenda Item 9

able to optimise its use of resources. The next step will be the presentation of the budget alongside the refreshed Corporate Plan at the Court of Common Council.

4. With these key documents in place, and a new corporate performance management process in development, the City Corporation will be able to drive departmental activities to deliver on corporate priorities and allocate resources in full knowledge of where it can achieve most impact on the issues and opportunities faced by the City, London and the UK.

5. Following the presentation of draft high-level business plans to Service Committees in November and December, a further refinement was made to the format to update departmental ambitions to refer to the Corporate Plan outcomes. Members should therefore start to see closer alignment between the Departmental business plans and the Corporate Plan outcomes.

6. Work is also taking place on reviewing the content and format of the supporting detail that will sit beneath the high-level business plans. This includes: information about inputs (e.g. IT, workforce, budgets, property and assets); improved links to risk registers; value for money assessments, and schedules of measures and key performance indicators for outputs and outcomes. This will be a key element in the move towards business planning becoming a joined-up service planning process that links directly to Corporate Plan outcomes.

High-level planOpen Spaces Department7. This report presents at Appendix 1, the final high-level Business Plan for 2018/19

for the Open Spaces Department.

8. The high-level plan was presented to this Committee on 18 December, for noting. This revised plan continues to reflect the breadth of the Department recognising the services provided at Tower Bridge and the Monument, Keats House, our Open Spaces across and beyond London and the City’s Cemetery and Crematorium

9. Further work has been undertaken by a cross-divisional Board, including colleagues in the Corporate Strategy and Performance team and senior open spaces managers. This Board consolidated the top line objectives so that they better align with the Corporate Plan; whilst ensuring that they are relevant across our diverse service areas. The proposed new Business Plan (Appendix 1) identifies three top line objectives:

Open spaces and historic sites are thriving and accessible Spaces enrich people’s lives Business practices are responsible and sustainable

Below these sit a number of outcomes and through the use of numbers, the Plan aims to show how these link through to the twelve outcomes in the Corporate Plan 2018 - 2023.

10.Delivery of the business plan is driven through divisional plans and activities.

Page 20

11. To evidence how the service is performing we will continue to monitor and report on performance indicators. The performance measures relating to Tower Bridge, the Monument and Keats House are shown as Appendix 2. In addition, we will look to identify new and more outcome based measures to demonstrate the impact and benefits of the services we provide. Therefore, some of the Business Plan outcomes currently have no measures assigned to them. The six monthly review of the Business plan will propose additional measures.

12.The Business Plan identifies a number of key programmes and projects which the Department will initiate and progress over the next year including: progress a number of capital improvement projects at the central heritage sites

including Keats House and Gardens, launch of a fully accessible education facility at Tower Bridge, review the potential for a secure exit facility at the Bridge’s South Tower and progress a standalone Visitor Centre for the Monument.

Corporate & Strategic Implications13.The main Corporate outcomes the Open Spaces Department aims to have an

impact on are:

Contribute to a flourishing society

Shape outstanding environments

Conclusion14.This report presents the final high-level plan for 2018/19 for the Open Spaces

Department for Members to approve and provide feedback. The approved Plan will set out the top-line objectives and outcomes, key programmes and projects which the Department will progress and deliver in the year ahead.

Appendices Appendix 1 – High-level business plan 2018-19 Appendix 2 – Performance measures

Background PapersDecember 2017: Draft Departmental Business Plans 2018/19

Gerry KieferBusiness Manager – Open Spaces Department

T: 020 7332 3517E: [email protected]

Page 21


Page 22

Appendix 1: We enrich people’s lives by enhancing and providing access to ecologically diverse open spaces and outstanding heritage assets across London and beyond

The main Corporate Plan Outcomes (CPO) we aim to impact on are:

Contribute to a flourishing society CPO2 - People enjoy good health and wellbeingCPO3 - People have equal opportunities to enrich

their lives and reach their full potentialCPO4 - Communities are cohesive and have the

facilities they need

Shape outstanding environments CPO10 - We inspire enterprise, excellence,

creativity and collaborationCPO11 - We have clean air, land and water and a

thriving and sustainable natural environment.CPO12 - Our spaces are secure, resilient and

well-maintained

Our total 2018–19 budget is:(Local and central risk, recharges and surveyors local risk)

What we do is: Protect, enhance and provide access to open space; preserve heritage; provide engaging visitor opportunities, conserve and enhance biodiversity; share history; enable community engagement and learning; provide respectful commemoration and disposal of the dead

(Expenditure) (£000)

Income(£000)

Net cost(£000)

City of London Cemetery & Crematorium (5,492) 4,821 (671)City Gardens & Bunhill Fields (2,313) 429 (1,884)West Ham Park (1,930) 316 (1,614)Directorate & Learning Programme (1,594) 1,353 (241)The Commons (Burnham Beeches, Stoke Common and City Commons)

(3,340) 324 (3,016)

Epping Forest (7,808) 1,678 (6,130)Hampstead Heath, Highgate Wood, Queen’s Park & (11,848) 2,993 (8,855)Keats House (710) 710 0Monument (634) 669 35Tower Bridge Operational (2,342) 0 (2,342)Tower Bridge Tourism (5,507) 6,261 754

Total (43,518) 19,554 (23,964)

Our top line objectives and outcomes are:A. Open spaces and historic sites are thriving and accessible.

1. Our open spaces, heritage and cultural assets are protected, conserved and enhanced (10)2. London has clean air and mitigates flood risk and climate change (1, 11, 12)3. Our spaces are accessible, inclusive and safe (1, 2, 12)4. Our habitats are flourishing, biodiverse and resilient to change (10, 11, 12)

B. Spaces enrich people’s lives. 5. People enjoy good health and wellbeing (2, 3, 4)6. Nature, heritage and place are valued and understood (2, 3, 4)7. People feel welcome and included (3, 4, 10)8. People discover, learn and develop (3)

C. Business practices are responsible and sustainable. 9. Our practices are financially, socially and environmentally sustainable (5, 11)10. London’s natural capital and heritage assets are enhanced through our leadership, influence, investment,

collaboration and innovation (7, 9, 11)11. Our staff and volunteers are motivated, empowered, engaged and supported (8)12. Everyone has the relevant skills to reach their full potential (8)

What we’ll measure: Ecological condition Visitor experience Green Flags and Green

Heritage Knowledge of learning

participants Intention of participants

to visit again or recommend to friends

Volunteering participation and experience

Number of customers / visits / satisfaction across our services

Condition of heritage assets

Ope

n Sp

aces

Dep

artm

ent,

2018

- 19

Bus

ines

s P

lan

epar

tmen

t of O

pen

Spa

ces

The numbers show how our outcomes and Departmental programmes and projects link to delivering the Corporate Plan Outcomes 2018-2023.

Page 23

https://corpoflondon.sharepoint.com/sites/Intranet/Shared%20Documents/Version%2020%20-%20clean%20version%20for%20final%20clearance%20with%20CPR%20pre%20CoCo%202018%2002%2020.pdf?csf=1&e=NxGceM

Departmental programmes and projects a) Progress a number of capital improvement projects at the central heritage sites including Keats House and Gardens,

the launch of a fully accessible education facility at Tower Bridge, review the potential for a secure exit facility at the Bridge’s South Tower and progress a standalone Visitor Centre for the Monument (3, 4, 10).

b) Continuously develop the visitor offer across the Department in terms of content, processes, technology, customer service and cultural programming (3, 4, 7, 9)

c) Develop and agree a sustainable model for delivering Learning (3, 4, 10)d) Deliver opportunities arising from improved management capability from the City of London Corporation (Open Spaces)

Bill (1, 3, 10, 12)e) Protect our heritage at risk: developing partnership funding bids at Wanstead Park and Bunhill Fields while completing

funded works at Kenley Common (10, 1)f) Develop engineering studies for six Raised Reservoirs at Epping Forest (1, 11, 12)g) Develop sustainable football improvements at Wanstead Flats (2, 9)h) Progress the replacement of ageing cremators with new at the Cemetery and Crematorium (11)i) Work cross-departmentally through Asset Management Planning to maximise the value of our assets including:

implementing agreed options for commercial wayleaves, Heathfield House, Warren House, lodges, Finsbury Circus and the former West Ham Park Nursery site (2, 4, 10,12)

j) Initiate and progress key capital and local risk projects including playgrounds, ancillary visitor and operational facilities and grazing expansion plans; (2, 4, 10,12)

k) Secure funding to create new accessible public spaces within the City’s churchyards (2, 4, 10, 12)l) Progress the Departmental Programmes including; Fleet, Energy Efficiency and Sports. (2, 4, 5, 11)m) Obtain agreement and implement the overarching Departmental and site specific ‘events’ policies (2, 4, 5,10, 12)n) Progress reviews, drafting and completion of management / conservation plans at Epping Forest, Hampstead Heath,

Stoke Common and West Ham Park (11, 12)

What we’ll measure: Customer service

standards Accreditations Staff satisfaction H&S accident

investigations Sickness absence Utility consumption Electricity generation Website visits and

social media engagement

Project management and delivery

Income Net budget position

Corporate programmes and projects Ensure efficient use of property and reduction in maintenance costs Provide support for the initial 24 apprenticeships within the department and seek to expand the programme using the levy funding Support the development of asset management plans and master plans for each site

How we plan to develop our capabilities this year Continue to deliver initiatives arising from the Culture Board Programme; increasing cross division working Make more effective use of IT and technology and adopt ‘smarter’ ways of working. Finalise and refine our outcomes framework to better understand and demonstrate our value to our customers Use GIS to support management of sites and enhance visitor information Develop and implement a Charitable Trusts fundraising strategy Enhance customer service through use of CRM

What we’re planning to do in the future: Improve our workforce planning and ensure our workforce is reflective of the communities we serve Develop the cultural profile of the Department’s heritage attractions Complete the process of land registration Develop on-line retail and bookings and increase opportunities for a cash-free environmentO

pen

Spac

es D

epar

tmen

t, 20

18 -

19 B

usin

ess

Pla

n

The numbers show how our objectives and Departmental programmes and projects link to delivering the Corporate Plan Outcomes 2018-2023.

Page 24

https://corpoflondon.sharepoint.com/sites/Intranet/Shared%20Documents/Version%2020%20-%20clean%20version%20for%20final%20clearance%20with%20CPR%20pre%20CoCo%202018%2002%2020.pdf?csf=1&e=NxGceM

Appendix 2 PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Top Line Objectives OutcomesPI

No: Description

Frequency

Measure

2018/19

Performance

Target

Link to Corporate Plan Outcomes

PI 1

Retain 15 Green Flags and improve the overall

band score achieved across our Green Flag sites

by 2018/2019

Annual

15 green flag sites overall

band score

53% = 80+

27% = 75 – 79

20% = 70 - 74

PI 2Retain 12 green heritage awards and increase

this to 13 sites by 2018/19Annual 13 Green Heritage Awards

A2. London has clean air and

mitigates flood risk and climate

change

Measures to be identified

1. People are safe and feel safe

- Prepare our response to natural and man-made threats.

11. We have clean air, land and water and a thriving and sustainable natural environment

- Provide a clean environment and drive down the negative effects of our own activities.

- Provide environmental stewardship and advocacy, in use of resources, emissions, conservation, greening,

biodiversity and access to nature.

- Influence UK and global policy and regulation and international agreements to protect the environment.

12. Our spaces are secure, resilient and well-maintained

- Build resilience to natural and man-made threats by strengthening, protecting and adapting our

infrastructure, directly and by influencing others.

PI 20Increase the number of ‘visitors’ to the Open

spaces webpages.Annual

2017/18 performance plus

10%

PI 27 Visitor numbers at Tower Bridge Exhibition 6 monthly

830,000 (TBC)

PI 28 Visitor numbers at Monument 6 monthly

230,000 (TBC)

PI 30To increase visitor numbers at Keats

house by 3%6 monthly 34,716 (TBC)

PI 5 Increase the number of burials 4 monthly2017/18 performance plus

2.5 %

PI 6 Increase the number of cremations 4 monthly2017/18 performance plus

1.5%

A4. Our habitats are flourishing,

biodiverse and resilient to change Measures to be identified

10. We inspire enterprise, excellence, creativity and collaboration

- Create and transform buildings, streets and public spaces for people to admire and enjoy.

11. We have clean air, land and water and a thriving and sustainable natural environment.

- Provide thriving and biodiverse green spaces and urban habitats.




- Build resilience to natural and man-made threats by strengthening, protecting and adapting our

infrastructure, directly and by influencing others.

A. OPEN SPACES AND

HISTORIC SITES ARE

THRIVING AND

ACCESSIBLE

A1. Our open spaces, heritage and

cultural assets are protected,

conserved and enhanced

A3. Our spaces are accessible,

inclusive and safe


- Curate a vibrant, attractive and complementary blend of uses of space.

- Protect, curate and promote world-class heritage assets, cultural experiences and events.

1. People are safe and feel safe

- Protect consumers and users of buildings, streets and public spaces.

- Safeguard children, young people and adults at risk.

2. People enjoy good health and wellbeing

- Provide advice and signposting to activities and services.

- Provide inclusive access to facilities for physical activity and recreation.


- Maintain our buildings, streets and public spaces to high standards.

Page 25


No: Description

Frequency

Measure

2018/19

Performance

Target


A. OPEN SPACES AND

HISTORIC SITES ARE

THRIVING AND

ACCESSIBLE







PI 16Increase the amount of tennis played across our

sites.6 monthly

Increase to be calculated

based on 2017/18 actual

performance

PI 17Increase the amount of football played across

our sites.6 monthly

Increase to be calculated

based on 2017/18 actual

performance

PI 18Increase the number of golf visits at Chingford

Golf Course.6 monthly

Increase 2017/18

performance by 5%

B2. Nature, heritage and place are

valued and understood Further measures to be identified


- Promote equality and inclusion in health through outreach to our working, learning and residential

communities and better service design and delivery.

3. People have equal opportunities to enrich their lives and reach their full potential

- Provide access to world-class heritage, culture and learning to people of all ages, abilities and

backgrounds.

4. Communities are cohesive and have the facilities they need

- Bring individuals and communities together to share experiences and promote wellbeing, mutual respect

and tolerance.

- Support access to suitable community facilities, workspaces and visitor accommodation.

PI 12

Increase the percentage of new participants in

the Learning Programme who report their

intention to visit our open spaces with their

families

6 monthly70% of participants surveyed

PI 13

Increase the percentage of Learning Programme

participants who are from Black and Minority

Ethnic or under-represented groups


PI 19

Increase the percentage of customers surveyed

as part of the 60 second survey or similar that

stated the ‘overall rating’ of the open space as

‘very good or excellent’.

Annual2017/18 performance plus

5%

PI 29Achievement of Customer Care standards

at the Tower Bridge Exhibition

6 monthly90%.

PI 32

To maintain high or increase Net Promoter

Score as an indication of customer

satisfaction at Keats house

6 monthly 76

B4. People discover, learn and

develop PI 11

Increase the percentage of Learning Programme

participants who are more knowledgeable about

the natural history of our open spaces.



- Raise awareness of factors affecting mental and physical health.

- Provide inclusive access to facilities for physical activity and recreation.


- Provide access to world-class heritage, culture and learning to people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds.




- Promote and champion diversity, inclusion and the removal of institutional barriers and structural

inequalities.


- Bring individuals and communities together to share experiences and promote wellbeing, mutual respect

and tolerance.




- Create and transform buildings, streets and public spaces for people to admire and enjoy.

- Champion a distinctive and high-quality residential, worker, student and visitor offer.


- Provide access to world-class heritage, culture and learning to people of all ages, abilities and

backgrounds.

B. SPACES ENRICH

PEOPLE'S LIVES

B3. People feel welcome and

included

B1. People enjoy good health and

wellbeing

Page 26


No: Description

Frequency

Measure

2018/19

Performance

Target


A. OPEN SPACES AND

HISTORIC SITES ARE

THRIVING AND

ACCESSIBLE







PI 3Achieve our Departmental net local risk

budget.Annual £10,320,000

PI 8 Reduce utility consumption (electric) Annual2.5% reduction on 2017/18

performance

PI 8 Reduce utility consumption (gas) Annual2.5% reduction on 2017/18

performance

PI 9 Reduce fuel consumption (red and white diesel) Annual5% reduction on 2017/18

performance

PI 9 Reduce fuel consumption (petrol) Annual5% reduction on 2017/18

performance

PI 9 Reduce fuel consumption (small fuels) Annual5% reduction on 2017/18

performance

PI 10 Increase electricity generation Annual

A further two additional

buildings generating 50KWH

each

PI 4Increase our market share of burials in relation to

the Cemetery and Crematorium’s seven

neighbouring Borough’s

4 monthly2017/18 performance plus

0.5 %

PI 7As a minimum, achieve local risk Cem & Crem

income target 4 monthly £4,821,000

PI 25To achieve the overall income target for

Tower Bridge 6 monthly £6,091,000

PI 26To achieve the overall income target for

Monument6 monthly £669,000

PI 31Increase revenue through retail and private

hire by 5% at Keats house6 monthly TBC

C2. London’s natural capital and

heritage assets are enhanced

through our leadership, investment,

collaboration and innovation

Further measures to be identified

7. We are a global hub for innovation in financial and professional services, commerce and culture

- Strengthen local, regional, national and international relationships to secure new opportunities for business,

collaboration and innovation.

- Preserve and promote the City as the world-leading global centre for financial and professional services,

commerce and culture.

- Promote London for its creative energy and competitive strengths.

9. We are digitally and physically well-connected and responsive

- Develop and trial smart innovations and better manage demand.

- Improve the experience of arriving in and moving through our spaces.


- Influence UK and global policy and regulation and international agreements to protect the environment.

5. Businesses are trusted and socially and environmentally responsible

- Model new ways of delivering inclusive and sustainable growth.

- Support, celebrate and advocate responsible practices and investments.




C. BUSINESS

PRACTICES ARE

RESPONSIBLE AND

SUSTAINABLE

C1. Our practices are financially,

socially and environmentally

sustainable

Page 27


No: Description

Frequency

Measure

2018/19

Performance

Target


A. OPEN SPACES AND

HISTORIC SITES ARE

THRIVING AND

ACCESSIBLE







PI 14Increase the amount of directly supervised

volunteer work hours Annual


5%

Increase the amount of indirectly supervised

volunteer work hoursAnnual


10%

PI 15Increase the amount of unsupervised volunteer

work hoursAnnual


10%

PI 22

Reduce the average number of Full Time

Employee (FTE) working days lost per FTE

due to short term sickness absence.

Quarterly3.2 days FTE Working

Days Lost per FTE

PI 23

Reduce the average number of FTE

working days lost per FTE due to long term

sickness absence.

Quarterly2.30 days FTE Working

Days Lost per FTE

PI 24

Increase the percentage of Open Space’s

staff who state they are at least satisfied

with their workplace in the annual staff

wellbeing survey.

Annual 95%

C4. Everyone has the relevant skills

to reach their full potential PI 21

Increase the percentage of H&S accidents

that are investigated within 14 days.6 monthly 86%

8. We have access to the skills and talent we need

- Identify future skills needs, shortages and saturations.

- Champion investment in relevant skills and diverse talent pools.

C3. Our staff and volunteers are

motivated, empowered, engaged and

supported

8. We have access to the skills and talent we need

- Promote the City, London and the UK as attractive and accessible places to live, learn, work and visit.

- Identify future skills needs, shortages and saturations.

C. BUSINESS

PRACTICES ARE

RESPONSIBLE AND

SUSTAINABLE

Page 28

Committee(s) Dated:

Culture, Heritage and Libraries 14/05/2018

Subject:Inspiring London through Culture – Revision of Criteria and Processes

Public

Report of:Peter Lisley, Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile DirectorReport author:Nick Bodger, Head of Cultural and Visitor Development

For Decision

Summary

This report seeks to inform Members of the decision in March 2018 of the Resource Allocation Sub-Committee and Policy and Resources Committee to support the implementation of the Central Grants Unit on a permanent basis from the 1 April 2018 and of the uplift of £30,496 awarded to the Inspiring London through Culture grant theme’s 2018/19 grant pot (from £52,837 to £83,333).

The report also seeks approval for some minor amendments to the theme’s awarding criteria; most notably, for the maximum grant threshold to be raised from £7,500 to £10,000, and from £10,000 to £15,000 for awards made in exceptional circumstances.

To align the Inspiring London Through Culture grant theme with other themes in the Central Grants Programme and with City Bridge Trust practice for grants of £10,000 or less, the report also seeks delegated authority for the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director to be able to approve all grants of £10,000 or less in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee (who would be invited to sit on the grants assessment panel), with grants over this threshold (should the amendments to the criteria be accepted) and any applications that the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director deems contentious being referred to Committee as is current practice.

This recommendation is driven by a need to align themes, deliver a consistency of approach across City Corporation grant-making and ensure that the end user – the grant applicant – has the best experience, with grant decisions being communicated swiftly so enabling the applicant to plan better and make more effective use of the support offered.

Recommendation(s)

Members are asked to:

Note the uplift of £30,496 to the Inspiring London through Culture grant pot for the 2018/19 financial year;

Page 29

Agenda Item 11

Approve the amendments to the Inspiring London through Culture eligibility criteria as tracked in appendix 1; and

Delegate grant decisions for awards of £10,000 or less to the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee.

Main Report

Background

1. In March 2016, your Resource Allocation Sub-Committee and Policy and Resources Committee received a report outlining the work undertaken to implement the recommendations of the Service Based Review (SBR) in relation to grant-making.

2. The aim of the review was to:a. increase the strategic impact of such givingb. ensure that grants are managed with greater efficiency and effectivenessc. improve the consistency and quality of the customer experience to deliver

reputational benefits

3. The report recommended a consolidated Central Grants Programme (CGP) be implemented and that the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee be appointed to approve grants falling under the Inspiring London through Culture theme of the programme.

4. To manage the Central Grants Programme effectively, a new Central Grants Unit (CGU) was piloted to manage all grant applications, monitoring and evaluating processes and Committee reporting procedures.

5. It was agreed that the Unit should be co-located within City Bridge Trust (CBT) to facilitate consistency of approach and harmonise service standards. The Chief Grants Officer, whose responsibility includes the grant-making activities of the Trust, maintains an overview of the Unit, with relevant input from the Head of Charity and Social Investment Finance within the Chamberlain’s Department.

6. The Finance Grants Oversight and Performance Sub Committee are tasked with scrutinising the effective implementation of the programme.

Current Position

7. In September 2017, consultants Rocket Science were commissioned by the Central Grants Unit to undertake an evaluation of the 2-year pilot and review the programme overall, its processes and its decision-making structures. The evaluator spoke with Members, principal officers that lead the grant assessment panels and City Bridge Trust officers that oversee the Central Grants Unit.

Page 30

8. The key findings of this work are outlined below:a. Outsourcing to the Unit, overseen by the CBT has been worthwhile,

bringing transparency, grant-making expertise and professionalism to the process;

b. The process that has been put in place, though bringing clear benefits, is resource-intensive for the level of funding involved;

c. A more consistent approach to Members’ involvement would be beneficial to improve efficiency;

d. The budget available is not clear to many of those involved; ande. If the CGP were retained, a longer-term, more strategic view should be

determined.

9. This independent evaluation also highlighted that the Inspiring London through Culture theme was less effective than other programmes. This resulted from a questionnaire given to principal officers working on the assessment panel rather than any a wider context or analysis and is now confirmed as having been solely due to the Head of Cultural and Visitor Development scoring two statements very lowly and declining to answer a third (which others answered). These statements were:

a. The Central Grants Programme is targeting the projects/beneficiaries that it was set up to support.

b. We are able to support the type of projects that fit with our department’s strategy

c. The new criteria sufficiently capture the original purpose of the bequests which were amalgamated in order to form this grant programme.

10.The Head of Cultural and Visitor Development marked 9a and 9b at 1 (other themes were marked between 3 and 7) because the new eligibility criteria across all themes had meant that grants for Thames Festival Trust (Totally Thames) and Spitalfields Music amongst others could not be renewed at the same level. Acutely aware of the reliance of these organisations on this funding and of the value of these organisations to the cultural and visitor strategies (and hence the department), he reflected this in his scoring. He declined to score item c because it was not relevant to the theme (others scored this between 5 and 6). The result was that the Inspiring London through Culture theme was shown as much less effective than other themes.

11.Contrary to this assessment, the Senior Grants Officer has confirmed that the Inspiring London through Culture theme is the best performing based on interest, grants awarded and management of its officer panel. This was reported to the Finance Grants Oversight and Performance Sub-Committee of the Finance Committee on the 10 April 2018.

12.With reference to the efficiency of the Central Grants Programme (item 8c above), Members are asked to note that the Enjoying Green Spaces and Stronger Communities themes of the Programme delegate grant decisions to officers in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of their respective committees. Similarly, decisions regarding City Bridge Trust grants of £10,000 or less are made by officers, reporting to Members for information.

Page 31

13.This accords with best practice for low-value awards and saves on resource (the preparation of papers for Committee) as well as time, meaning grant applicants hear decisions much sooner and so can plan more effectively (a grant decision can be communicated to an applicant around 5-7 weeks earlier if not considered by a committee).

14.Time is particularly important when applicants need to apply for a change of use for awards – as was the case in April this year when the City Music Foundation requested to amend their original proposal (considered by your Committee in March) due to circumstances beyond their control. In this case, officers had to prepare reports under urgency to meet with a very tight deadline (the project could not have been realised if the decision waited for Committee). This process – although only a matter of days – was resource intensive and could potentially have impacted negatively on the project.

15. In March 2018 the Resource Allocation Sub-Committee and Policy and Resources Committee met and agreed to support the implementation of the Central Grants Unit on a permanent basis from the 1 April 2018; at the same time, the grant pot for the Inspiring London through Culture grant theme was uplifted by £30,496 to £83,333. £15,758 was not committed in 2017/18 and will be carried forward subject to the standard year-end approval process by the Chairman of Finance and the Chairman of Policy and Resources. If carry forward is approved the total budget will be £99,091 for the year. Additional funds may be made available to the programme during the year if other carry forwards are agreed. Further information about this will be reported to committee in July.

Proposals

16.Aligned with the findings of the independent assessment as outlined in item 8, your officers have reviewed the criteria for the Inspiring London through Culture theme of the Central Grants Programme and recommend a number of minor updates to make processes more efficient and to ensure that the current criteria is fit for purpose. The revised criteria are outlined at Appendix 1. Any approved changes will be launched at the beginning of August once the current application deadline comes to an end in July.

17.The only substantial change is to increase the maximum award from £7,500 to £10,000 with up to £15,000 considered in exceptional circumstances. This recommendation is based on 18 months’ experience of running the programme and soliciting feedback from grant applicants. The current thresholds were set on the basis that the theme sought to deliver enabling grants only (and not fully fund projects) and so with a lower threshold, more projects could be supported, and the benefit spread more widely. Since inception however, these thresholds have proven prohibitive as they do not support applicants in a robust enough way to underpin a project and/or drive investment from other sources.

18. It is also proposed that authority be delegated to the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director to approve all grants of £10,000 or less in consultation with your Chairman and Deputy Chairman. It is suggested that this may be done by

Page 32

inviting both to sit on the officer grant assessment panel (as is the practice with the City Arts Initiative).

19.Applications for grants over £10,000 (in exceptional circumstances) and those that Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director, and/or Chairman and Deputy Chairman consider may be contentious – it is recommended – are deferred to your Committee in the usual way.

20.This recommendation is made to align the Inspiring London through Culture grant theme with others in the Central Grants Programme and with the grant-making practice of the City Corporation more widely, in particular its City Bridge Trust. It is anticipated that such a move will reduce the strain on resources, deliver decisions to applicants sooner (saving weeks of waiting) and so generate positive perceptions of the City Corporation’s grant-making activities.

21. In the 18 months that the officers have been making grant recommendations to your Committee, only one has been questioned by Members (Amos Trust, March 2018). In this instance, the assessment panel had flagged the application and referred it to the Director of Communications and more robust evidence of the checks and balances within the project was received before it was presented to your Committee. Under the newly-recommended structure, such an application would still be referred to your Committee for consideration.

Corporate & Strategic Implications

22. In the City Corporation’s Cultural Strategy 2018/22, one of seven values to be cited is that “We seek to be joined up, agile, experimental and generous in our approach as a catalyst and convener at the forefront of cultural, economic and social change”. The proposals in this report help us to do just that.

Implications

23.Although the most popular under the Central Grants Programme, the Inspiring London through Culture grant theme was underspent last year by £15,758. With an uplift to the grant pot of £30,496, and the fact that not all applications apply for the maximum award, the raised levels for grant giving are considered affordable. Furthermore, it is anticipated that they will have a far greater impact at this raised level and so give greater resonance for the City’s cultural offer and its beneficiaries overall.

24.For the Central Grants Unit to establish consistent approaches across its programmes and to reduce the administrative burden on officers, it is important to ensure decision-making processes are aligned. This report seeks to ensure the Inspiring London through Culture grant theme uses the same best practice principles as all grant-making programmes under the City Corporation banner by putting low-value grant decisions in the hands of officers.

25.Applicants will experience a quicker and more efficient decision-making process as a result of the proposed changes.

Page 33

Conclusion

26.The Inspiring London through Culture grant theme of the Central Grants Programme is the most popular and – arguably – the most effective of all themes. It is, however, unaligned with best practice principles for grant-decision-making and constrained by the level of grants it can award.

27.The recommendations in this report – to delegate grant decisions to the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director in consultation with your Chairman and Deputy Chairman, and to raise the maximum level of awards to £10,000 – seek to address these issues and improve upon an already well-performing grant operation.

28.The referral of grant applications above £10,000 and of those applications officers consider contentious in any way, will help to safeguard the integrity of the theme and enable Members to direct business as unusual in regard to the programme.

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Revised Criteria for the Inspiring London through Culture programme (tracked)

Nick BodgerHead of Cultural and Visitor Development


Page 34


Inspiring London through Culture1. Introduction

The City of London Corporation (CoLC) aims to keep the Square Mile as the creative heart of a world-leading city of culture. It also wishes to fulfil its historic role as a steward of unique heritage of international importance. The City is one of the great cultural hubs of London, much visited from all around the world, with a wealth of things to see and do and a vibrant mix of artistic activity.

The CoLC is one of the UK’s major funders of culture and heritage and directly supports a range of institutions and activities in these fields. It also recognises and welcomes the wide range of organisations, large and small, who further enrich the Square Mile’s cultural offer and who may benefit from additional support or sponsorship to help initiatives to develop.

2. Types of projects and activity to be supported

The scheme deliberately seeks to be open-minded and imaginative in defining the kinds of activities or projects which can be supported. Proposals must meet one or more of the following criteria:

Promoting access for all to participate in the City of London’s cultural offer Investing in London’s creative future through innovation and excellence Enhancing public benefit in the City of London through culture and heritage Supporting the development of the City of London’s Culture Mile.

Successful schemes must deliver some or all of their benefits within the Square Mile itself – we do not have funds to support schemes which will be wholly delivered elsewhere in London. Without being prescriptive, we are likely to welcome proposals which demonstrate

Some level of matched funding – we value opportunities where some City funding can help to lever in funding from other sources

Partnership with one or more cultural/heritage providers already operating within the City.

This funding theme has a modest amount of funding and so large projects are beyond its scope. It is anticipated that individual grants will not normally exceed £10,000, though up to £15,000 may be considered for exceptional cases. The awarding Committee has the power to go above this ceiling, but the circumstances would need to be compelling.

Proposals will be considered and decided by a group of expert officers from across the City with decisions reported to the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee.

Page 35

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/support-promotion-and-advice/Pages/What-is-the-Cultural-Hub.aspx

3. Who can apply for a City of London Corporation Grant?

The CoLC Central Grants Programme is open to individuals or organisations that fall into one of the following categories:

Registered charity Registered Community Interest Company Registered Charitable Incorporated Organisation Charitable company (incorporated as a not-for-profit) Exempt or excepted charity Registered charitable industrial and provident society or charitable cooperative

(Bencom) Constituted voluntary organisation

If you are an individual wanting to make an application, we ask that you apply for funding through a constituted group, organisation or charity who will be able to support and countersign your application and thus have “ownership” of the project.

Overview:

The minimum grant allowed will be £500 and the maximum that will be considered will be £10,000. In exceptional circumstances applications for £15,000 will be considered at the discretion of the panel.

Applications for the 11th January deadline will receive a decision in March 2019.

Projects must have some or all benefits delivered within the City of London although applicants may be based outside the City.

4. How do you apply for a grant?

To apply for a CoLC grant you will need to complete an online application form by the corresponding deadline and submit this electronically with your supporting documents to the CoLC Central Grants Unit.

You should send your application to us well before the stated deadline to allow us to process your application in time. We will only consider one application from your organisation at any one time.

All application forms should be completed through the online CoLC grants web portal. Application forms in large print, Braille or audio tape will be offered to applicants by special request.

5. How are applications assessed?

Page 36

Once the CoLC has received your online application and all supporting documents it will be passed to one of the CoLC’s Grant Officers for assessment. As part of this process a Grants Officer may contact you for more information.

We will acknowledge receipt of your application within 10 working days of it being received. If your application is not complete it will be returned to you and you will have a further 10 working days to send us the missing information.

A Grants Officer may also arrange to visit your organisation as part of the assessment process. Once a full assessment has been completed your request will be referred to an appropriate Committee.

The timescale to process your application will vary; however, we will endeavour to ensure your application is assessed within 12 weeks of the closing date. You should take account of this when planning your project.

6. How do we monitor and evaluate grant recipients once an award has been made?

If we fund your project we will need you to complete an end of grant monitoring report to confirm how the grant has been spent and what you achieved. Please make sure that you keep receipts for all the items or services you buy with the grant and that you keep them somewhere safe as we may ask you to provide them.

We may also visit you to check how the grant has been spent.

Please keep us up to date if your project or any of your contact details change at any stage during the period of your grant.

7. If your grant application is successful

If your application is successful, an initial offer letter detailing the level of grant awarded will be issued. This may contain special conditions relating to the grant award or pre-agreement grant conditions.

Grant acceptance terms and conditions will be subsequently issued which should be signed and returned within 20 working days.

Once all documentation has been received and approved you would be asked to formally request payment of your grant award.

Note: You cannot start your project until we have received, checked and approved all information that we have requested.

8. If your grant application is unsuccessful

Page 37

Due to the limited budget available and the number of applications for funding we receive, the CoLC unfortunately cannot provide funding to every applicant that applies for a grant. Grants are therefore issued on a discretionary basis, there is no appeal process and the decision of the CoLC is final.

9. Support with your application

We urge all applicants that are unsure about whether to submit an application to read all available eligibility criteria on our website and attend one of our Grants Officer led workshops; dates for which will be publicised on our website throughout the year.

If you have an enquiry that is not covered within the online guidance, please contact the CoLC Central Grants Unit direct, who will be able provide answers to general queries regarding the application process.

10. Can you reapply for funding?

You may reapply for funding to deliver a continuation of the same project however; organisations cannot hold more than one of our grants at any one time

If you are a current grant holder, you will need to have satisfactorily met all our grant monitoring requirements before applying again.

11. What do we not fund?

There are some things which we are unable to pay for and these are shown below.

activities that have already taken place or start before we confirm our grant any costs you incur when putting together your application fundraising activities for your organisation or others items that are purchased on behalf of another organisation loans or interest payments projects that actively promote religious or political activities purchase of alcohol

12. Further information

If you have questions about how to apply or about the status of an application, you can contact us on 020 7332 3712, email us at [email protected], or visit our website www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/centralgrantsprogramme to find out more.

Page 38


http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/

Committee(s) Dated:

Culture, Heritage and Libraries – For Decision 14/05/2018

Subject:City Arts Initiative: recommendations to the Culture, Heritage & Libraries Committee

Public

Report of:Peter Lisley – Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile DirectorReport author:Nick Bodger, Head of Cultural and Visitor Development

For Decision

Summary

This report presents the recommendations of the City Arts Initiative (CAI) which met on 19 April 2018. At this meeting, the CAI considered the following proposals:

1. Crossrail Art Foundation: Conrad Shawcross, Manifold, proposal to install a permanent sculpture at Moorgate as part of the Crossrail development.

2. London Festival of Architecture: four applications for temporary, month-long installations across the City of London as part of the annual festival.

3. Contemporary Art Society: Michael Landy, Humanitarian Aid Memorial, proposal to install a permanent monument to humanitarians in the City of London.

Recommendation(s)


Ratify the City Arts Initiative’s recommendations in relation to the above proposals as follows:

o Crossrail Art Foundation: approve the proposed installation and recommend that sleeved bollards be considered.

o London Festival of Architecture: approve the installation of the proposed temporary artistic interventions, subject to implementation of CAI recommendations on access, security, location and other issues; and agreement with Transport for London (TfL), and the City Corporation’s City Gardens and Highways teams where appropriate.

o Contemporary Art Society: decline, noting the sculpture’s significant scale and thus its unsuitability for siting in the City’s small gardens and churchyards.

Page 39

Agenda Item 12

Main Report

Background

1. The City Arts Initiative was established to improve the management of public art in the City. It provides advice to your Committee and other service Committees as appropriate on proposals for new public art (temporary and permanent), the maintenance of the City’s existing public art and, if necessary, decommissioning.

2. In 2015/16, your Committee appointed your Chairman, Deputy Chairman and Mrs Barbara Newman to sit on the City Arts Initiative panel.

3. Apart from officer time handling enquiries and looking after the installations, there are no resource implications other than where specifically noted.

Current Position

4. The CAI met on 19 April 2018 to consider the proposals outlined below.

5. Full-colour visual representations of the proposed artworks are circulated electronically with this report and available in appendix 1. Details of all applications are available on request from the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director.

Proposals

Crossrail Art Foundation: Conrad Shawcross, Manifold

6. The CAI received a proposal for the placement of a permanent sculpture at the western ticket hall entrance to the Elizabeth Line Moorgate/Liverpool Street Station.

7. The Crossrail Art Foundation, a registered charity founded with significant support from the City Corporation, has a mission to promote art for the benefit of the public by establishing and maintaining a public art programme that will enhance the journeys of the millions of people who will use the Elizabeth Line each day.

8. The sculpture by Conrad Shawcross is cast in bronze and proposed for a site that provides sufficient support to the piece without impacting on works below ground; the site has been selected in consultation with the City Corporation’s Public Realm team and sponsor Land Securities.

9. The CAI raised concerns that the standard City of London bollards shown in the proposal would detract from the artwork and recommended that sleeved bollards be used to allow for the possibility of changing the outward look of them later. They offered their visual arts expertise to help develop these

Page 40

sleeves at a later date so that they are in keeping with the artwork should the applicant/City teams find this input useful.

10. The CAI recommended that this proposal be approved and that a sleeved bollard be considered.

London Festival of Architecture

11. The London Festival of Architecture is an annual event which receives much public and press interest. The City Corporation has entered into a partnership with the festival and is working with them to deliver a number of installations across the City in June 2018.

London Festival of Architecture: Sigita Simona Paplauskaite, The Building Site

12. This is the first of four proposals received by the CAI for consideration. The installation consists of a small walled garden surrounding a full-sized tree. The interior panels of the installation are mirrored, giving the visitor a sense of being in a larger garden space.

13. The CAI raised concerns regarding accessibility for wheelchair users due to the use of gravel inside the structure (a hard surface is required) and the limited “turning” space available.

14. Concerns were also raised with regards to the security of the piece overnight and its attractiveness as a place for rough sleeping, urination or “hiding”.

15. The size of the piece was also thought to be an issue and it was recommended that it be placed at the top of Peter’s Hill, opposite St Paul’s, given this location’s capacity to house a work of this scale.

16. The CAI recommends this proposal for approval, provided the piece is made accessible (a 1.5m x 1.5m platform of hard standing – not gravel – is required just inside the entrance so that wheelchair users can go inside and turn around); and that proper consideration is given to security concerns (24-hour security will be necessary). The preferred location is at the top of Peter’s Hill opposite St. Paul’s Cathedral.

London Festival of Architecture: G-Tainer

17. This installation is collaboration between G-SMATT Europe, London Festival of Architecture, the Royal Exchange and other partners. Its purpose is to display the latest technological innovations in ‘Smart Glass’ and ‘Digital Media Facades’ in an accessible and public space.

18. The proposal seeks to site a single-story ‘G-Tainer’ structure in the outside space at the rear of the Royal Exchange. Measuring 2.5m wide by 5m long, the black steel-framed and glazed structure will display specially-designed video media across its surface, with ‘stakeholders’ able to use the internal

Page 41

space and to “display promotional, artistic and engaging content to communicate with those viewing from outside”.

19. The CAI voiced strong concerns regarding the media to be displayed on the structure, noting the no advertising regulations in the City and potential reputational risks. It was agreed that all content would need to be cleared with the City Corporation’s Media team in advance of upload.

20. Concerns were also raised over accessibility to the interior of the structure and the security of it overnight.

21. The CAI recommends this proposal for approval on the absolute proviso that digital content contains no advertising or promotion (this a legal requirement within the City’s streetscape) and that all content is cleared with the City Corporation’s Media team prior to upload, with turnaround times negotiated directly between parties. It also recommends that it is only approved if:

a. The internal space is closed to visitors unless 24-hour security is provided

b. The internal space (if open) is made accessible (that a ramp is built to provide step-free access with the revised footprint agreed with the City Corporation’s Highways team);

c. Manifestations on the glass are provided so that when no digital content is played, the screens are clearly seen.

London Festival of Architecture: A City of London Bench in Cheapside

22. In partnership with the London Festival of Architecture, the City Corporation and the Cheapside Business Alliance have been running a design competition for new (one-off) public benches. Images of previous winning designs for a project in Royal Docks were submitted as an indicative visual, however, the CAI have requested to see the winning design prior to its installation.

23. In considering this proposal, the CAI raised concerns over where the winning designs will be sited within the Cheapside footprint, with a recommendation being made that they only be installed after large-scale events planned in the first week of June are over.

24. A recommendation was also made that the City Corporation’s Public Highways team and TfL be involved in the final location decision to ensure no obstruction is created for existing users of the space.

25. Concerns were also raised over the bench(es) becoming permanent fixture(s) as was suggested in the proposal, noting that their suitability to the space(s), ownership, maintenance and liability would all need more careful consideration in such a scenario.

26. The CAI recommends that this proposal be approved in principle for the period of the festival in June only provided it is installed after 3 June 2018 at Royal Exchange and is not obstructing exits from the Underground station;

Page 42

and after 9 June at other locations if sought (to ensure major, pre-planned events are not affected). The CAI also recommends that:

a. The final designs are submitted to CAI once agreed;b. The exact locations are agreed with the City Corporation’s Public

Highways team and TfL;c. The Cheapside Business Alliance indemnify the City for the bench(es)

assuming all liability in the case of accident or injury (insurance documents to be evidenced);

d. A separate planning application is submitted for the bench(es) to remain in-situ beyond the period of the festival (June 2018).

London Festival of Architecture: Alex Scott-Whitby, St. Paul’s Reflection

27. This proposal uses a trapezoidal contemporary gateway structure to create a mirrored image of St Paul’s Cathedral as pedestrians arrive out of St Paul’s Underground Station. Its proposed location is in the pocket park space at the western end of One New Change.

28. The work is made using over 400 highly reflective steel or anodised aluminium poles suspended vertically from a simple light weight structural canopy; at the middle of the structure is a domed oculus taking its inspiration from the geometry of St Paul’s Cathedral’s double-domed construction.

29. The work is an innovative architectural and structural solution by a team of emerging architects and urban designers (ScottWhitbyStudio) and the team behind some of London’s most experimental (and successful) artistic interventions including the Serpentine Pavilions (Arup).

30. The timing and proposed location for this installation pose an issue for a pre-planned, large-scale event (London Nocturne) which occurs during the first week of June; the CAI therefore recommends that this may only be installed after 9 June 2018 (or before it and removed by the 8 June).

31. From drawings provided and meetings held with the applicants, it has been identified that one of the supports is to be placed into an existing planter; this would need permission from City Gardens team who were unable to attend the CAI meeting this month.

32. Concerns were raised that this proposal suggests the installation becomes a permanent structure. It was noted that its suitability for the site, ownership issues, maintenance and liability would all need closer consideration in such a scenario.

33. The CAI recommends that this proposal be approved for the period of the festival in June only provided that it is either installed after the major event on Saturday 9 June (so from Sunday 10 June), or that it is installed for one week prior, then removed on Friday 8 June and reinstalled from Sunday 10 June. The CAI also recommends that:

Page 43

a. Approval is subject to the City Gardens team approving use of their planter to support the structure;

b. A separate planning application is submitted for consideration by the District Surveyor for the piece to remain in-situ beyond the period of the festival (June 2018).

Contemporary Art Society: Michael Landy, Humanitarian Aid Memorial

34. The CAI received a proposal from the Contemporary Art Society and the Humanitarian Aid Memorial Steering Group to place a permanent memorial, designed by an established artist, in one of the City’s Gardens.

35. The proposed work is designed as a robust piece of street furniture built from stainless steel sub-frames welded together and clad in colourfast, weather and vandal-proof vitreous enamel.

36. It was agreed that the subject and contemplative nature of the proposal would sit well within the proposed location of Postman’s Park although concerns were raised by the City Gardens team after the CAI meeting regarding its scale and thus suitability for this, or any City Garden space.

37. Because the proposal is for the work to be situated in a grassed area, it would not require any adaptations for accessibility. If it were to be sited in a paved area, it would need to rest on a plinth.

38. The CAI recommended that this proposal be approved subject to an officer from the City Gardens team working with the applicant to identify a suitable location within a City Garden and subject to planning permission being granted. Since the CAI meeting, the City Gardens team have recommended that the application be declined because of its size and thus unsuitability to the City’s small gardens and churchyards. The recommendation is therefore amended to application declined


39. The City Arts Initiative was formed to support the City’s management of public art which supports the delivery of the City’s Cultural and Visitor Strategies.

Conclusion

40. This report summarises the discussions of the City Arts Initiative and presents recommendations in relation to the public art applications considered on 19 April 2018.

Page 44

Appendices

Appendix 1: visual representations of proposals received by the CAI on 19 April 2018

Background Papers

Full details of the applications received by the City Arts Initiative are available on request from the Assistant Town Clerk and Culture Mile Director.



Page 45



Page 46

Crossrail: Conrad Shawcross, Manifold

Page 47

London Festival of Architecture: Sigita Simona Paplauskaite, The Building Site

Page 48

London Festival of Architecture: G-Tainer

Page 49

London Festival of Architecture: A City of London Bench in Cheapside

Page 50

London Festival of Architecture: Alex Scott-Whitby, St. Paul’s Reflection

Page 51

Contemporary Art Society: Michael Landy, Humanitarian Aid Memorial

Page 52

Committee(s) Dated:


Subject:Spitalfields Music Grant Update - For Information

Public


For Information

Summary

In November 2014, your Finance Committee as the trustee of the City’s Educational Trust Fund awarded a grant of £45,000 per annum for three years (2016/17 to 2018/19) to Spitalfields Music. This award was endorsed by your Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee.

Recommendations from the Grants Service Based Review saw the City Educational Trust Fund transfer to your Education Board in March 2016, and a new policy was adopted with grant levels and committed terms significantly reduced to enable a wider distribution of funds. This has resulted in it not being possible for Spitalfields Music – now in the final year of their funding with us – to apply for a grant for the same amount and for a three-year commitment period as per current arrangements.

Spitalfields Music have been informed of this and options for alternative funding from the City Educational Trust Fund and other themes within the City Corporation’s Central Grants Programme have been highlighted to them.

In January 2018, your City Bridge Trust Committee awarded £90,000 over three years (3 x £30,000) towards Spitalfields Music’s The Endless Imagination programme, and your City Outdoor Arts Programme commissioned them to deliver Livery Hall concerts for £13,000 and retention of all box office receipts. The 2018/19 value of this grant and commission exceeds the value of their final grant instalment from the City Educational Trust Fund, demonstrating a clear and on-going commitment to the organisation from the City Corporation and suggesting that, despite the changes, Spitalfields Music will continue to thrive.

Recommendation(s)


Note the report

Page 53

Agenda Item 13

Main Report

Background

1. Spitalfields Music (also known as Spitalfields Festival) was established in 1976. It has received grants from the City Corporation since 1996. These grants have supported its two annual music festivals (held in summer and winter), as well as its year-round learning and participation programme.

2. Grants have been awarded to Spitalfields Music from City’s Cash, City Fund, Bridge House Estates through City Bridge Trust, and the City Educational Trust Fund (CETF), noting that the City Corporation is the corporate trustee of both Bridge House Estates and CETF.

3. From 2011/12 to date, grants to Spitalfields Music were made from the City Educational Trust Fund (CETF) in accordance with the grant-making policy in place at the time. The last (and current) award was made by your Finance Committee (as sole trustee of CETF) in November 2014; this was for £135,000 over 3 years (at £45,000 per annum) running from 2016/17 to 2018/19. The award was endorsed by your Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee.

4. Oversight of the CETF was transferred from your Finance Committee to your Education Board as an outcome of the Grants Service Based Review in March 2016, and a new policy was adopted to guide the application of funds.

5. Following recommendations from the Education Charity Sub (Education Board) Committee and the Community and Children’s Services Committee, the Education Board resolved to approve revised eligibility criteria for the CETF and the City Corporation’s Combined Education Charity on 20 July 2017. The review of the eligibility criteria looked at how the CETF could maximise the advancement of its charitable objects while aligning its activities with the City Corporation’s Education Strategy.

6. Existing grant awards were considered during this review and it was determined that more impact could be achieved from the CETF’s funds if more organisations could receive grants. As a result, the maximum threshold for grants was significantly reduced.

Current Position

7. Spitalfields Music is due a final payment in this financial year (2018/19) under its current grant award (see item 3). The revised grant-making criteria will not allow for the organisation to apply for funding at the level and term they have enjoyed in the past. The maximum award under the CETF is now set at £25,000 over two years or £12,500 a year.

8. Spitalfields Music is eligible to apply to the CETF for such an award for a project that meets with the trust criteria; broadly, this is for research, study and/or teaching in the arts. Any future application will need to be made through the

Page 54

Central Grants Programme within stated deadlines. Funding will only be considered on receipt of a satisfactory monitoring and evaluation report from Spitalfields Music on their current funding from the CETF.

9. Similarly, Spitalfields Music is eligible to apply under other themes of the Central Grants Programme. Most pertinently, the Inspiring London through Culture theme which awards one-off grants of £7,500 (or £10,000 in exceptional circumstances) for relevant cultural projects taking place in the City of London and/or the Stronger Communities theme for community focussed projects that take place here or on one of our housing estates.

10.A letter from your Chairman of Culture, Heritage and Libraries has been sent to Spitalfields Music confirming the new eligibility criteria of the CETF and alerting them to these opportunities.

11.Members should note that the City Corporation is still a demonstrably strong supporter of Spitalfields Music. In January 2018, your City Bridge Trust Committee awarded funding of £90,000 over three years (3 x £30,000) towards their The Endless Imagination programme in care homes, and your City Outdoor Arts Programme commissioned them to deliver three Livery Hall concerts for £13,000 and retention of all box office receipts for this year’s Women: Work and Power programme.


12. In the City Corporation’s Cultural Strategy 2018/22 under strategic objective 3 –Support cultural excellence in a range of fields and champion an ethos of innovation, creative risk taking and artistic citizenship – a priority action is Supporting our existing cultural organisations with sustained investment and resources, working closely to help them realise their ambitions.

13.The City Corporation as trustee of the CETF is fulfilling its responsibility by advancing the objects of the charity while aligning the criteria to the City’s Education Strategy. This new policy will allow for the charity to benefit a larger number of organisations delivering educational outcomes in London. Spitalfields Music has received a generous contribution to its education programme from this charity and will be welcome to apply under the new criteria subject to satisfactory monitoring and evaluation of its current grant and its proposed project meeting the new criteria.

14.That said, Spitalfields Music has been able to secure the value of its current grant again in the 2018/19 financial year through its City Bridge Trust award and the commission cited in item 11. Furthermore, it may continue to apply for grants under the themes cited above and thus has a greater level of opportunity (and flexibility) for the financing of its programmes.

Conclusion

15.Spitalfields Music is a hugely valued part of the City’s cultural and educational offer. While grant support under current arrangements cannot continue for the

Page 55

reasons outlined, the organisation has been swift to exploit other funding options offered by the City Corporation and – in the final year of its current grant award–has raised the same level of funding again from alternative City Corporation grants and funding streams.

16.Going forward, your Chairman and officers have highlighted other potential funding routes for Spitalfields Music under the new Central Grants Programme and will continue to support them with advice and – potentially – opportunities for commissions where these may be relevant to their programming abilities and capacity.

Appendices

None



Page 56


Committee(s) Dated:


Subject:London Landmarks Half Marathon: monitoring and evaluation headlines

Public


For Information

Summary

On Sunday 25 March 2018, the London Landmarks Half Marathon (LLHM) saw just under 10,000 runners complete a 13-mile route across the City of London and Westminster. The race was watched by approximately 40,000 spectators.

This report outlines some of the key findings from the robust monitoring and evaluation exercise undertaken by the organisers and considers whether the City’s ambitions for hosting the event – in particular the aim for the race to shine a light on our sometimes hidden, often quirky cultural and heritage offer – were met.

While attractions taking part in race day (by opening early and/or by hosting special programmes to draw crowds) have reported disappointing numbers, it is noted that the profile of the City’s cultural offer has been much enhanced, with a PR reach for the race of over 42m and 78% of spectators perceiving the City to be a more cultural place as a consequence of watching it; in addition, 70% of spectators assert that they are more likely to come to other cultural events in the City as a result of their time here.

All in all, the event was a significant success, with over £4.46m raised for 102 charities, 779 volunteers engaged from City communities and educational establishments, and significant exposure achieved for our cultural offer.

Recommendation(s)


Note the report

Main Report

Background

1. The London Landmarks Half Marathon took place on Sunday 25 March 2018. The race sought to raise over £4m for charities (principally for Tommy’s, the

Page 57

Agenda Item 14

charity organising the event), to engage City communities and to shine a light on the City’s cultural offer.

2. Your Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee received a presentation from Tommy’s at your meeting in January 2018 and endorsed the events’ ambitions, particularly in respect to showcasing City attractions and programmes.

3. Since the City Corporation was first approached by Tommy’s with the race proposal, your Cultural and Visitor Development team have worked with the race organisers to develop animations and activities at key points of interest on-street and at City visitor attractions to realise this ambition.

Current Position

4. While, ultimately, this did not bear fruit – the Billingsgate Roman House and Baths saw only seven visitors during race day and the Guildhall Art Gallery (with Roman activations in Guildhall Yard) only saw a modest 73 additional visitors – the main route of the race through the City was well populated with spectators.

5. Furthermore, a PR reach of approximately 42m was achieved, with 78% of the 40,000 spectators (c. 31,200) perceiving the City to be a more cultural place because of watching the race and 70% of spectators (c. 28,000) asserting that they are more likely to come to other cultural events in the City as a result of their time here.

6. These and other headline findings are detailed in the London Landmarks Half Marathon Evaluation Report at appendix 1 and in the detailed Spectator Survey jointly commissioned from the Audience Agency by the City Corporation and the London Landmarks Half Marathon Team. This is available from the City Corporation’s website.

Proposals

7. In a debrief with the race organisers post-event, the low turnout at City attractions was acknowledged and it was agreed that this was probably to be expected given that spectators would – on the day – want to stay on the race route to cheer on their families and loved ones. It was also acknowledged that the City route was less well-populated with spectators than Westminster where the start and finish lines attracted crowds of thousands.

8. To help promote the City’s attractions at future London Landmarks Half Marathons (these will be subject to the approval of your Streets and Walkways Committee) and noting that 80% of race participants were from outside of London, staying in the capital for the weekend – many with their families – it was proposed that City promotions and discounts be mailed to runners ahead of their visits so that they and those accompanying them may enjoy the City’s offer on the Saturday before the race. This will also be easy to track.

9. Similarly, it was agreed that one of the race’s most popular activations which attracted very large crowds in Westminster, would be relocated in the City, should

Page 58

the race be approved for 2019, so rebalancing, to some small extent, the number of spectators across the two areas.

10.The debrief also acknowledged that clearer instructions around the location of activation sites may help to swell attendance in future years and the race organisers undertook to ensure this happens in mapping and on their website if the 2019 race is approved.


11.The City Corporation’s support of London Landmarks Half Marathon is aligned with its Cultural Strategy 2018/22 under strategic objectives 7 and 9, stating that it will:

a. Better promote our world class culture and heritage offer and use our wealth of outdoor spaces to widen our appeal to a more diverse audience, enabling communities in the City and beyond

b. Play our part as a catalyst and convener in supporting and connecting with the wider cultural ecology of the capital, the rest of the UK and globally.

Conclusion

12.All in all, the London Landmarks Marathon was a significant success, with over £4.49m raised for 102 charities and 779 volunteers engaged from City communities and educational establishments.

13.A PR reach for the race of over 42m and that 78% of spectators perceived the City to be a more cultural place as a consequence of visiting while 70% asserted that they are more likely to come to other cultural events in the City as a result of their time here, suggests that our cultural ambitions for supporting this event were achieved.

14.The low attendance at City attractions during the race is likely a result of spectators wishing to cheer on those they have come to support, and this has been noted as a key learning, with proposals already in place for next year as detailed above.

Appendices Appendix 1 - London Landmarks Half Marathon Evaluation report

Background PapersLondon Landmarks Half Marathon: Spectator survey results, Audience Agency [March 2019] – available on the City Corporation tourism intelligence pages at https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/Documents/london-landmarks-half-marathon-spectator-survey-results.pdf



Page 59

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/Documents/london-landmarks-half-marathon-spectator-survey-results.pdf

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/Documents/london-landmarks-half-marathon-spectator-survey-results.pdf



Page 60

LONDON LANDMARKS HALF MARATHON (LLHM) REPORT

FOR THE CITY OF LONDON CORPORATION

LLHM OBJECTIVES

1) Raise £4m for 50 charities

2) Celebrate the history of the City and shine a spotlight on its’ quirky and hidden secrets

3) Engage the City community

4) Create valuable volunteer opportunities

5) Encourage people to get fit and healthy and stay healthy

6) Bring positive economic benefit

7) Showcase the City and inspire thousands to enjoy it

8) Deliver a well organised run that becomes an annual event in the City’s calendar

OBJECTIVE 1: RAISE £4M FOR 50 CHARITIES

The 2018 LLHM managed to secure 102 charity partners and has raised £4.49m for charity to date.

TARGET ACTUAL RECEIVED TO DATE

TOMMY’S £1.48m £2.014m*

OTHER CHARITIES £2.52 £2.48m*

GRAND TOTAL £4m £4.49m*

* These figures are expected to rise once ‘offline income’ (money received through paper sponsor

forms and matched giving) is accounted for.

OBJECTIVE 2: CELEBRATE THE HISTORY OF THE CITY AND SHINE A SPOTLIGHT ON ITS

QUIRKY AND HIDDEN SECRETS

QUIRKY & HIDDEN ROUTE SIGNS

LLHM quirky and hidden route signs drew

runners and spectators’ attention to the

following sites in the City along the route:

• London’s Largest Grass Hopper

• Roman Temple of Mithras

• Pudding Lane

• Dick Whittington’s House

• Shakespeare’s House

• Chancery Lane Air Raid Shelter

• Great Bell of Bow

HISTORICAL ACTIVATIONS

The LLHM staged five historical activations in the City along the LLHM route

ACTIVATION PARTNER(S): DESCRIPTION

Dr Johnson’s

Party

Dr Johnson’s House Celebrating the life and work

of Dr Johnson, creator of the

English dictionary.

Postal Past

Celebration

Postal Museum

Post Office Vehicle

Owners Club.

The Post Office Vehicle

Owners Club and the Postal

Museum helped reveal the

fascinating stories behind

postal history.

Page 61

Roman

Reception

Museum of London

Guildhall Art Gallery

LEG II AVG Roman

Living History Society

At the Guildhall Yard a Roman

Reception brought Londinium

to life.

Bow Bells St Mary-le-Bow Guild

of Ringers

The Bow Bells rang a very

special ‘Date touch’

celebrating 2018 and

showcasing St Mary-Le-Bow

Church.

Billingsgate

Bath House

Experience

City of London

Corporation

Visitors to the bath house

were offered an insight in to

ancient life in the City

THEMED CHARITY CHEER STATIONS

Our charity partners staged themed charity cheer stations along the LLHM route which brought to life

part of London’s history. Examples in the City include the below.

CHARITY THEME

Make-a-Wish

London’s transport

system.

The Royal

British

Legion

Commemorating the end

of the First World War the

Royal British Legion’s

band performed outside

St Paul’s Cathedral.

Alzheimer’s

Research UK

Based in Cheapside and

celebrating London's

markets throughout the

ages with colourful stalls

and classic barrow boy

antics.

Prostate

Cancer UK

Prostate Cancer UK

championed London’s old

and hidden pubs.

Macmillan

Cancer

Support

Brought to life London’s

first coffee house.

Spectators enjoyed a

cuppa whilst playing

games and marvelling at

a London skyline created

in biscuits!

Page 62

LITTLE SPOTTERS TREASURE HUNT

The LLHM developed free family-friendly treasure hunts that brought to life London’s hidden animals.

There were three trails with 2 starting in the City. This is still being distributed by the City Information

Centre as it is not time limited.

GUIDED HISTORY TOURS

7 guided history tours were created for the LLHM. Five of these were in the City and led by the City

Guides with whom we partnered.

The short tours (c15 minutes each) were titled:

• Wordsmiths & Publishers

• Sainted Souls

• The Heart of the City

• Money

• Fire! Fire!

The map below shows the tours:

Page 63

OBJECTIVE 3: ENGAGE THE CITY COMMUNITY

YOUNG PEOPLE

• The City of London Academy Islington

o Provided Young Ambassadors: the children worked with the history guides and

introduced the public to the event, the area and the history tours themselves.

▪ Students were provided with a training session and learning resources to enable

this.

o Staged a school choir performance: the choir performed a 15-minute set on our

performance stage.

• The Guildhall School of Music and Drama

• The Guildhall School Brass Band performed at the Tommy’s cheer station at Bank

junction. They entertained the crowds by playing everything from the Rocky theme tune

to the Jurassic Park soundtrack and in doing so received high praise from runners,

spectators and event staff alike.

CULTURAL GROUPS

• The Pearly Kings and Queens gave out medals at our finish line which was well received by

runners.

• The Welcome People provided volunteers who helped with the Bowler Hat Send Off at the

start line. We were introduced to the Welcome People by Cheapside Business Alliance.

DIGNITARIES

• The Sherriff of the City of London (Neil Redcliffe) and the Chief Commoner (Wendy Mead)

attended the Roman Reception in Guildhall Yard.

CITY CORPORATES

• Grange Hotels: Official Hotel Partner of the LLHM providing a 15% discount to LLHM

participants and entered a team of runners into the event

• Bloomberg: Manned a water station with volunteers and entered a team of runners into the

event

• ING: Provided volunteers for the Postman’s Park activation and made good luck calls to

Tommy’s runners.

• TPP: Made good luck calls to Tommy’s runners

• The City of London Corporation, Cannacord & M&G: Entered a team of runners

• The Cheapside Business Alliance: Helped to recruit volunteers and promote the event to

their networks.

• Vinoteca's restaurant in the Bloomberg Arcade: Offered 25% discount on food

Page 64

OBJECTIVE 4: CREATE VALUABLE VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES

• Total volunteers: 679

• Young Volunteers 120

Volunteers were recruited from various City organisations including Bloomberg, ING, The Welcome

People, The Pearly Kings & Queens and City of London Academy Islington as well as national

membership groups (such as the Police Cadets and the Soroptimists), sporting organisations (such as

Reading Roadrunners and Fulham Running Club) and London specific groups such as the Chelsea

Pensioners.

OBJECTIVE 5: ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GET FIT AND HEALTHY AND STAY HEALTHY

PARTICIPANT SURVEY RESULTS

• General health & wellbeing: 91% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that participation

in the LLHM had helped improve their general health & wellbeing.

• Diet: 76% of participants agreed that they would continue with the positive lifestyle changes

they had made to their diet.

• Alcohol consumption: 52% of participants agreed that they would continue with the positive

lifestyle changes they had made to their alcohol consumption.

• Smoking: 38% of participants agreed that they would continue with the positive lifestyle

changes they had made to how much they smoke.

VOLUNTEER SURVEY RESULTS

• 64% of volunteers were inspired to take part in an organised running event in the future.

OBJECTIVE 6: BRING POSITIVE ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO OUR CAPITAL CITY

LLHM PARTICIPANT DEMOGRPAHIC

Number of participants 9684

Female 5892 (61%)

Male 3792 (39%)

Average age 39.3

Youngest runner 17

Oldest runner 81

LLHM LOCATION DEMOGRPAHIC

• 80% of LLHM participants came from outside of London.

Region No of

Finishers

%

South 2751 28.41%

London 1949 20.13%

East 1931 19.94%

Yorkshire/E

Midlands

744 7.68%

Midlands 464 4.79%

South West 377 3.89%

West 296 3.06%

North West 258 2.66%

Wales 218 2.25%

Overseas 198 2.04%

Page 65

N Ireland 132 1.36%

Highlands &

Islands

116 1.20%

North East 99 1.02%

Central Scotland 82 0.85%

Borders 55 0.57%

Unknown 14 0.14%

Grand Total 9684 100.00%

OVERNIGHT STAYS

• The LLHM participant survey revealed that 44% of LLHM participants arranged an overnight stay

in London for them and their supporters.

VISITING HISTORICAL OR CULTURAL LANDMARKS

• The LLHM participant survey revealed that 23% of LLHM participants visited a historical or

cultural landmark over race weekend

Page 66

ESTIMATED SPECTATOR NUMBERS

• The LLHM participant survey revealed that 10,000 participants brought approximately 30,000

supporters with them.

• Given that 74% of spectators were at the event to support a participant, this suggests the

remaining 26% of spectators total approximately 10,000, giving an estimated total spectator

figure of 40,000.

ESTIMATED SPECTATOR SPEND

• Spectators spent on average £20 in the area during or after the event. Based on 40,000

spectators, this suggests a total spectator spend of approximately £800,000.

• As 82% were in the area for the LLHM, it’s reasonable to estimate that approximately £650,000

was spent across the Cities of London and Westminster which would not have been spent were

it not for the LLHM taking place.

OBJECTIVE 7: SHOWCASE THE CITY AND INSPIRE THOUSANDS TO ENJOY IT

PR COVERAGE

• 105 pieces of coverage were secured between Dec 17 – April 18 spanning regional, London,

national and international titles across news, sport, health & fitness, lifestyle, diary, what’s-on &

charity

o 89 appeared Online

o 8 in Print

o 3 aired on TV

o 3 broadcast on Radio

o 2 were included in external database

e-shots

• Potential reach of over 42,261,633

FACEBOOK LIVE BROADCAST

• The LLHM was broadcast live through the LLHM and Standard Sport

Facebook pages with the following results

o LLHM page reach: 344,493

o Standard Sport page reach: 93,991

o Total reach: 438,484

Page 67

OUTDOOR BILLBOARD ADVERTISING

• Five billboard screens were donated to the LLHM over race weekend in

prime locations across London

• Total OTS: 996,349

o OTS: The average number of times an individual notices an

outdoor advertising message during a defined period of time

SPECTATOR SURVEY RESULTS KEY FINDINGS

VISITNG LONDON

• 96% of spectators lived in the UK, the majority in London (52% of all spectators).

• The London Landmarks Half marathon was the reason the majority of respondents were in the area

– 82% would not have been in the area otherwise. Of the remainder, half lived in the area and half

stumbled across it.

AWARENESS AND MOTIVATION

• 88% of spectators knew about the London Landmarks Half Marathon before arriving in the area.

• Of those who had previous knowledge of The London Landmarks Half Marathon, the majority had

heard about it from someone taking part in the event (76%).

• The main motivation for attendance was to support someone taking part in the Half Marathon

(74%).

ENTERTAINMENT

• Half of respondents (50%) knew in advance that there were events and entertainment running

alongside the Half Marathon. 29% of the remaining respondents were unaware that there were

events and entertainment available.

• Live music and Charity Cheers Station(s) were the most popular events and entertainment at the

Half Marathon, with 33% and 26% of respondents either having seen and/or planning to see them.

However, a large proportion of respondents (30%) were not aware of the entertainment on offer.

• The majority of respondents described having a positive experience at The London Landmarks Half

Marathon, with ‘Fun’ and ‘Exciting’ being the most commonly used words (with 51% saying one or

both of these words).

• The need for more publicity about the entertainment emerged as a theme, as 50% of respondents

had no prior knowledge, and around a quarter of respondents who provided a comment felt that

more publicity was needed.

PERCEPTION AND FUTURE VISITS – CITY OF LONDON SPECIFIC

• Unprompted, a quarter of spectators referred to the area in which they were watching the London

Landmarks Half Marathon as ‘The City’ or ‘The City of London’.

o Two thirds did not refer to the area by this name, but were aware they were in the City, and

9% did not know they were in the City.

• The majority of spectators had a positive (62%) or neutral (32%) impression of the City of London

before visiting.

o After visiting, 29% said their perception had changed ‘A lot’ or ‘To some extent’.

• The event had a positive impact on spectators’ perceptions of the City of London as a cultural place

– 78% thought the city was a more cultural place ‘A lot’ or ‘To some extent’ as a result of visiting

the LLHM (78%).

• 70% of spectators were either ‘Much more likely’ or ‘A bit more likely’ to come to other cultural

events in the City of London in the future.

Page 68

FEEDBACK

Best Half Marathon ever!

Brilliant to see London and especially the City of London used in such a positive way.

The vibe and atmosphere on the day were excellent and I'm sure this event will prove

extremely popular next year.

Page 69


Page 70

Committee(s) Dated:

Planning and Transportation Committee – For DecisionCulture Heritage and Libraries Committee – For InformationResources Allocation Sub (Policy and Resources) Committee – For Decision

26 March 2018

14 May 20183 May 2018

Subject:

Funding for Enforcement Officer for City’s Bridges

Public

Report of:David Smith, Director of Markets and Consumer ProtectionReport author:Steve Blake, Markets and Consumer Protection Department

For Information

Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek approval to the funding from Bridge House Estate of an additional post managed within the Markets and Consumer Protection Department for a Licensing Officer to be dedicated to carry out enforcement activities on the City’s Bridges, particularly those bridges, parts of bridges and adjacent areas which are normally within the jurisdiction of neighbouring Local Authorities.

Recommendation(s)


Agree to the creation of a full time Licensing Officer post dedicated to enforcing across the City’s Bridges and

Agree to the funding of this post from the Bridge House Estates Fund.

Main Report

Background

1. Reports were given to the Port Health and Environmental Services Committee (PHES) on 4 July and 21 November 2017 regarding the issue of illegal street trading and the sale of peanuts from trollies mainly on and around City Bridges.

Page 71

Agenda Item 16

2. At the PHES Committee meetings several actions were agreed to combat illegal street trading.Following this, from August 2017 until the time of writing this report the followingactions have been achieved: 52 illegal traders have been stopped. 3 ice cream vans have been seized. 5 peanut trolleys have been seized. 21 traders have been prosecuted (including those still pending) with twoprosecutions still pending and Criminal Behaviour Orders will be sought onthese prosecutions. These actions are all within the City’s local authority jurisdiction.

3. The actions outlined above have contributed towards a reduction of illegal street traders within the City; however, illegal trading is still taking place on the bridges in the areas which fall within the boundaries of Southwark and Tower Hamlets. In addition, the action has been funded through the Licensing Team’s City Fund local risk budget and this is neither sustainable or appropriate, particularly where action is needed just outside of the City’s local authority boundaries.

4. The problems experienced with current enforcement actions in the reports to Court and PHES suggested some possible short, and longer-term measures to try to proactively manage and dissuade this type of activity. It is apparent that illegal traders are opportunistic and swiftly adapt to patterns of enforcement necessitating evening and weekend operations as well as those undertaken in the normal working week.

5. The short-term measures included investigating enforcement on Tower Bridge and this report concentrates on enforcement proposals across all the City’s Bridges.

6. Members will be aware that at Millennium Bridge the City boundary runs across the middle and therefore the illegal traders set up and trade within one metre of this boundary knowing that Licensing Officers from the City of London do not have the authority to act against them.

7. Similarly, City of London officers have no authority to enforce on Tower Bridge as this falls within the boundaries of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and Southwark. Both Boroughs have advised that they do not have the necessary resources to effectively enforce against illegal traders on the Bridge although Tower Hamlets are now being more active with respect to traders near Tower Bridge. A recent raid by bailiffs has closed the premises in Cable Street in Tower Hamlets believed to be used to store nut selling carts which were then used in trading in City, Southwark and Tower Hamlets.

8. A working group of Officers has been set up to co-ordinate action across all three authorities which includes City, Southwark, Tower Hamlets, TfL, and City of London Police. The second meeting of this group is due to meet to agree action plans on March 29 at Wood Street Police Station.

Page 72

9. This report therefore focuses on the City’s Bridges and presents a solution to deal with the ongoing issues of illegal trading which is currently not being regularly enforced.

Current Position

10. Illegal traders within the City of London are being proactively enforced by the City’s Licensing Team with successful prosecution and seizure of goods. This has resulted in very limited activity by peanut sellers and no ice cream vans being seen in the City since late 2017.

11.There are, however, ongoing issues with illegal traders (peanut sellers, ice cream vans and sellers of other paraphernalia) on the City’s Bridges which is especially prevalent on Millennium Bridge (Southwark side) and Tower Bridge.

12.City Officers have no enforcement authority on the south side of Millennium bridge and Tower Bridges although they are owned, funded and managed by the Bridge House Estates reflects poorly on the image and reputation of the City. This is also true of trading which has previously taken place to the south of London Bridge, in Southwark.

13.Tower Bridge, which receives circa 830,000 visitors per annum to the exhibition regularly has six peanut sellers (2 on the south and 4 on the north) 7 days a week and also attracts ice cream vans, souvenir and jewellery sellers.

14. In addition, at peak seasonal times they attract other undesirable elements such as gamblers and pickpockets which are reported to the Police who have attended but they disperse immediately.

15.Complaints are regularly received from visitors and members of the public regarding these traders as they identify them as being engaged by the City of London.

16.The Department of Built Environment (DBE) position has always been that illegal traders on our bridges is not acceptable as it is a security and safety concern with having mobile carts containing gas bottles and congestion on narrow pavements. There are also health issues as they attract pigeons and other vermin who deposit their droppings on the structure and pavement accelerating the deterioration and increasing the maintenance liability.

17.Security staff at Tower Bridge regularly move these traders on but as they have no powers they return once security have left. Consideration has been given to giving security enforcement powers, but this would remove them from their important primary duties of managing safety and security on the Bridge.

18. We are therefore currently reliant on our respective boroughs to enforce and as already advised they do not have adequate resources and can only respond on a very infrequent basis.

Page 73

19. Several meetings have been held to discuss the issues with council officers, Police, TfL, local resident groups and other interested parties to agree a way forward which could be implemented effectively.

20. One of these actions was for neighbouring boroughs to delegate authority to the City to enforce within their boundaries and I am pleased to advise that an agreement in principle has been reached with the London Borough of Southwark for the south side of the Bridges.

21.Similar discussions have also been held with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and whilst there is agreement in principle at Officer level this remains to be ratified through Tower Hamlets political governance procedures. As the matter was a subject of report which was agreed at PHES in November 2017 and the delegations were agreed by Court at the 8 March 2018 this can now proceed. It is anticipated being completed by the end of June 2018 following the same template being agreed with Southwark.

Options

22.The current position of illegal traders on City’s Bridges which fall within neighbouring boroughs will not be addressed as they do not have the necessary resources to effectively enforce against these traders.

23.To do nothing would not improve the problem and will continue to be an issue on the City’s Bridges and reflect poorly on the City of London as owners of popular visitor destinations.

24.With the agreement of the neighbouring boroughs the City will have the necessary authority to enforce. However, to maintain the current level of enforcement within the City and expand to include those parts of the bridges that fall within the London Borough of Southwark and Tower Bridge additional resources will be required. As these areas of enforcement lie outside of the City Local Authority area the City Fund allocation is not appropriate to this role of controlling, maintaining and policing the City Bridges. Funding for this additional activity is therefore sought from the appropriate fund which appears to be the Bridge House Estate.

25.Licensing Team will continue to carry out enforcement action against illegal traders in the City although without additional resources to deal with traders outside of the City’s local authority boundaries on and near City bridges this is likely to provide only a palliative effect and, in particular, will not help the situation on and around Tower Bridge.

Proposals

26. It is therefore proposed to recruit and designate a licensing officer whose primary role will be to enforce across all the City’s Bridges.

27.As this will be a bridge and adjoining areas specific role it is proposed to seek agreement to fund this post from the Bridge House Estate.

Page 74


28.This report incorporates the comments of both Open Spaces who now operate Tower Bridge and DBE who consider and maintain the physical infrastructure of the bridges

29.This proposal will support the Corporate Plan:

To provide modern, efficient and high quality local services, including policing, within the Square Mile for workers, residents and visitors,

To provide valued services, such as education, employment, culture and leisure, to London and the nation.

It will support the aim of the new Corporate Plan by strengthening the character, capacity and connections of the City, London and the UK for the benefit of people who live, learn, work and visit here. In doing this it will support two main aims in that it

o ‘contributes to a flourishing society’ in ensuring people are and feel safe and,

o ‘shapes outstanding environments’ in that our spaces are secure, resilient and well maintained.

30.This proposal will support two key strands of the City’s Cultural Strategy:

Animating the Heritage – increasingly helping people to discover our outstanding heritage assets, to bring history alive,

Breaking down Barriers – focusing on the importance of opening in all directions, welcoming visitors to the Square Mile and taking the City’s cultural offer to all of London, engaging more effectively with our local Borough partners.

Implications

31.The anticipated cost of this post is £50,000 p/a and it is proposed that it is provided for an initial period of 3 years and reviewed after this period. The short breakdown of anticipated costs is as follows: -

Assistant Licensing Officer £38k Additional resources where multiple selling sites are identified £5k Additional overtime payments £5k Equipment (Bodycams) £2k

£50k

Page 75

Conclusion

32.With the success of the Licensing Team in enforcing within the City of London there is now an opportunity to deal with the issues on the City’s Bridges. Although not within our boundaries the ongoing issues reflect very poorly on the City as owners and maintainers of these structures.

33.With the City being promoted as a visitor destination the bridges are obviously an attraction for tourists as well as local communities and the presence of illegal traders detracts from their enjoyment and experience.

34.Officers have been frustrated by the boundary issues as well as the lack of regular enforcement action from neighbouring boroughs and therefore welcome the delegation of powers.

35.Therefore, to effectively enforce on the Bridges an additional resource is required to concentrate on and around these structures and be a single point of contact working closely with neighbouring boroughs, Open Spaces, DBE and City of London Police to apply longer-term control.

Back Ground Papers

Illegal Street Trading Report – PHES 4 July 2017 Illegal Street Trading Report – PHES 21 November 2017 Illegal Street Trading -Item 20(B) – Court of Common Council 8 March 2018

Steve BlakeAssistant Director of Environmental Health and Public [email protected]

Page 76

Committee: Date:Culture Heritage and Libraries Committee 5th March 2018

Subject:Decision taken under Urgency since the last meeting of the Committee Public

Report of: Town Clerk

Report author:Julie Mayer, Town Clerk’s Department

For Information

Summary

This report advises Members of action taken by the Town Clerk since the last meeting of the Committee, in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman, in accordance with Standing Order No. 41(A) in respect of :

Inspiring London through Culture: City Music Foundation Change of use to a Grant approved by the Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee on 5th March 2018.

Recommendation: Members are asked to note the report.

Action Taken Approval was sought, under Urgency, for a change of use on a £7,500 grant awarded to the City Music Foundation through the ‘Inspiring London Through Culture’ theme of the Central Grants Programme. The grant was approved by CHL Committee on 5 March 2018 to deliver an opera performance of ‘The Man that Mistook his Wife for a Hat’, over three nights, at the Pathology Museum in Bart’s Hospital, in June 2018.

Due to the lead cast Member becoming indisposed, approval was sought for the change of use of the above grant to fund a new programme entitled; ‘Midsummer at St Bart’s’ with City Music Foundation’. This programme would take place over three different dates, at three different locations in June 2018; i.e. St Bart’s the Less, the Pathology Museum and Bart’s Hospital Square. Members are asked to note that this action is likely to increase audiences and, because the Foundation proposes to use three different venues within the hospital, accessibility (which was previously an issue) will be significantly improved.

Reason for Urgency:This approval was sought under urgency because the new programme could not be realised within the timeframe (to deliver performances in June), had the request not been considered by the Culture, Heritage and Libraries until 14 May 2018.

Page 77

Agenda Item 17


Page 78

Document is Restricted

Page 79

Agenda Item 21By virtue of paragraph(s) 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12Aof the Local Government Act 1972.

Document is Restricted

Page 81

Agenda Item 22By virtue of paragraph(s) 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12Aof the Local Government Act 1972.

Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee

Documents

Transcript of Culture, Heritage and Libraries Committee