Consultation Report

Home , Crown River Cruises, Lucketts Travel, Millbank Tower, Redwing Coaches, Safeguard Coaches, Thames Leisure

Proposed coach parking on Millbank

Response to consultation

May 2015 Proposed coach parking on Millbank Response to consultation May 2015 Contents

Executive Summary ...... 3 1 Background ...... 5 2 Introduction ...... 5 3 The consultation ...... 7 4 Overview of consultation responses ...... 8 5 Conclusion and next steps ...... 19 Appendix A – TfL response to issues commonly raised ...... 21 Appendix B – Copy of consultation letter ...... 25 Appendix C – Leaflet distribution area ...... 26 Appendix D – List of stakeholders consulted ...... 27 Executive Summary

About the consultation:

In March 2015, Transport for London (TfL) consulted on proposals for a new 158 metre coach parking bay on Millbank, close to Millbank Tower and Millbank Pier. The new coach parking would be next to the southbound (riverside) carriageway and would replace 13 pay-by-phone parking bays as well as a redundant bus stand and short stretches of single and double red lines.

We received 210 responses to the consultation, including many from coach operators, drivers and their representatives. There was strong support from the coach industry for the principle of providing more coach parking, with many respondents saying the proposals would go some way to compensating for the parking lost to the East-West Cycle Superhighway, although many felt that more provision was needed.

There were strong objections from some local landowners, who were concerned that the proposals would negatively affect the visual environment, public realm, access to the river, parking availability and general conditions for pedestrians. There were also concerns raised about the potential for conflict between coaches and cyclists.

Conclusion and next steps:

Permanent arrangements for coaches on Millbank: Having considered the issues raised in the consultation, we have reconsidered our plans for permanent coach parking at this location. Our permanent arrangements will therefore be to: 1. Formally permanently convert the bus stand opposite Thorney Street to four hour coach parking, and extend this new coach parking bay from 19 metres to 30 metres. 2. Extend the existing coach parking bay next to Millbank Pier from 39 metres to 45 metres. In total, this will provide an additional 36 metres of dedicated coach parking. These coach bays will be operated by Westminster City Council and will have a maximum stay of four hours. They will be installed with parking sensors to detect availability. The revised arrangements would mean no permanent changes to the existing pay-by-phone parking at this location.

Temporary coach parking on Millbank in spring/summer 2015: To support the coach industry during construction of the East-West Cycle Superhighway, there is a short-term need to provide temporary additional coach parking as quickly as possible within reasonable distance of Victoria Embankment. We therefore intend to

3 introduce our proposed coach parking temporarily from late May until late September 2015. The relevant pay-by-phone parking bays will be suspended and coaches allowed to park there for this period. We have arranged for the temporary coach parking to be available on Millbank before bays on Victoria Embankment are suspended for construction of the East-West Cycle Superhighway.

From late September 2015 we will introduce the permanent coach parking arrangements on Millbank and reinstate the 13 pay by phone parking bays. Westminster City Council recently consulted on proposals to provide an additional four pay by phone and two shared-use parking bays in the local area.

Other permanent coach parking: We will continue to work closely with the coach industry to identify and introduce additional permanent coach parking over the course of spring and summer 2015 to offset the provision lost to the East-West Cycle Superhighway.

About this document:

This document explains the processes, responses and outcomes of this consultation. Appendix A contains TfL’s responses to issues commonly raised.

1 Background In February 2015 Transport for London (TfL) announced it would go ahead with its proposals for the East-West Cycle Superhighway – a segregated cycle route which would mean changes to the road layout on Victoria Embankment, including a reduction in the available coach parking.

TfL has been working with Westminster City Council to identify alternative locations for coach parking displaced by the East-West Cycle Superhighway. One option identified was to replace an existing stretch of pay & display car parking on Millbank with a coach bay. TfL consulted local properties and stakeholders on the proposals in March 2015.

2 Introduction Transport for London (TfL) proposed to introduce a new 158 metre coach parking bay on Millbank, close to Millbank Tower and Millbank Pier. The new coach parking would be next to the southbound (riverside) carriageway and would replace: • 13 pay & display parking bays (79.5 metres in total) • One 3.8 metre stretch of double red line • One 16.8 metre stretch of single red line • One 19.2 metre bus stand (in which no formal activity currently takes place) • Two existing coach parking bays (39.3 metres in total)

The consultation explained that TfL was working with Westminster City Council to relocate some of the pay & display parking bays to nearby side roads and to confirm hours of operation of coach parking.

The new coach parking would replace some of the existing coach parking on Victoria Embankment, which will be removed as part of the East-West Cycle Superhighway. We said we would look to make the changes in May 2015.

2.1 Location map

2.2 Diagram of proposed scheme

3 The consultation Consultation on the proposals ran from Friday 27 March to Friday 24 April 2015. It ran in parallel to TfL’s formal advertisement of intent to change the relevant traffic orders to reflect the proposals.

The potential outcomes of the consultation were: • We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned • We modify the scheme in response to issues raised in consultation • We abandon the scheme as a result of issues raised in the consultation

The objectives of the consultation were: • To give stakeholders and the public easily-understandable information about the proposals and allow them to respond • To understand the level of support or opposition towards the proposals • To understand any issues that might affect the proposals of which we were not previously aware • To understand concerns and objections • To allow respondents to make suggestions

3.1 Who we consulted

The consultation intended to seek the views of a range of different groups potentially affected by or interested in the proposals. Those we consulted included: • Local residents and businesses • Local stakeholders, including Westminster City Council, local politicians and local interest groups • Users of the existing parking and coach parking facilities • Coach industry bodies and individual operators • Other road user groups (such as cyclists) • River operators

A list of the stakeholders we consulted is shown in Appendix D. A summary of their responses is given in Section 4.4.

3.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity

We sent a letter and map describing the proposals to 800 addresses in the vicinity of the proposed coach bay. A copy of this letter is shown in Appendix B and a map of the distribution area can be found in Appendix C. The letter was also emailed to 231 stakeholder contacts. A list of the groups consulted is shown as Appendix D.

The consultation invited participants to comment on the proposed changes. There were no closed questions.

Participants were invited to respond in the following ways: • Online survey at consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/millbank-coach • Emailing [email protected] • Post

People were also invited to view the relevant traffic order documentation at TfL’s and Westminster City Council’s offices.

4 Overview of consultation responses

4.1 About the responses

We received 210 responses to consultation. 187 were submitted online and 23 were received by email. 75 were from stakeholder groups and 135 were from members of the public (including coach drivers responding in a personal capacity). Please see section 4.4 for more information about stakeholder responses.

Table 1: Consultation responses by respondent Respondent Number Coach and tour operators and their 70 representatives Local venues / developers 3 Cycle groups 1

River service operators 1

Members of the public (including coach drivers responding in a 135 personal capacity

Postcode analysis: Of 194 respondents who supplied a postcode, only 7 were from the local SW1 area. The remainder were spread across London and the UK (as well as two from Germany).

4.2 Support level and issues raised in overall responses

We analysed comments received to assess whether respondents were broadly supportive, opposed or neutral about our proposal to introduce coach parking on Millbank:

Table 2: Indicative support levels based on comments Number of responses Broadly supportive 81 39% Partially supportive 9 4%

Broadly neutral* 87 41% Broadly opposed 30 14%

No comments supplied 3 1%

*(including comments not relating to Millbank such as those criticising the decision to introduce the East-West Cycle Superhighway

4.3 Summary of overall comments received

There were 210 unique respondents. 207 left a comment.

The following is a summary of the most popular comment themes, with a count (and percentage of 210) indicating how often it was raised. A comment theme is listed in this report if it was mentioned by 4 or more respondents (just over 2%).

Please see chapter 4.4 for a breakdown of responses by stakeholder organisations, including coach operators.

Need for coach parking

More coach parking needed: 131 respondents (62%) made a general comment requesting more coach parking in London. Many respondents asked for more coach parking as a result of the planned removal of spaces on Victoria Embankment, or due to a general shortage of spaces in central London tourist areas. Although not part of this consultation, many respondents took the opportunity to express displeasure at the reduction in coach parking on Victoria Embankment as part of the East-West Cycle Superhighway. A large proportion of the respondents were coach operators or coach drivers (please see chapter 4.4 for a breakdown of responses by stakeholder organisations, including coach operators).

25 respondents (12%) stated that finding a coach parking space is difficult at the moment, with some variously commenting that the time that drivers spend looking for parking makes it difficult to comply with driving time regulations and/or contributes to congestion and pollution. 9

Suggestions for alternative locations included elsewhere on Millbank, Atterbury Street, Albert Embankment, Battersea Park, Royal Albert Way and out-of-town sites from where shuttle services could take passengers into town.

Importance of coach parking to tourism and economy: 39 respondents (19%) stated that coach facilities in London are important as coaches bring large numbers of tourists to the capital. Many respondents also stated that encouraging this tourism benefits the local and wider economy as visitors spend money when they arrive. A small number of respondents indicated that tourists include students on educational trips and mobility impaired customers that require convenient travel and drop-off points. A small number also warned that making London more challenging for coach travel could deter operators or tourists.

Driving time regulations: 30 respondents (14%) pointed out that coach drivers are legally required to take breaks at set intervals and that coach parking is crucial for this. Some respondents mentioned that a lack of spaces causes difficulty in the context of work patterns and meeting these legal requirements.

22 respondents (10%) suggested that instead of the proposed layout, the cycle lane should be situated between the coach bays and pavement. Many respondents cited safety as the reason for this.

Millbank scheme in relation to Victoria Embankment: 20 respondents (10%) related the proposed new space at Millbank to the removal of existing space on Victoria Embankment, with a concern that overall provision should at least reflect what is being removed as part of the East-West Cycle Superhighway. Some added that it was important that the Millbank scheme is introduced before the removal of bays on Victoria Embankment.

Congestion: 18 respondents (9%) cited traffic congestion. Specific points raised include the extra congestion caused by coaches driving around to find a space, the extra travel and congestion caused by getting to Millbank compared with Victoria Embankment, and that coaches can often help to reduce congestion as they discourage car use.

Operating hours: 8 respondents (4%) made a comment or suggestion about operating hours in the proposed coach parking area. Most commented on the importance of accommodating drivers legally-required 45 minute breaks. CPT stated a preference for longer-term parking (with 45 minutes being the minimum).

Toilets: 4 respondents (2%) were concerned that there were no public toilets on Millbank, noting that groups boarding or alighting coaches often need to use these facilities. CPT was concerned that drivers would need access to toilets too.

Comments on impacts to other road users:

Cycle / coach conflict: 15 respondents (7%) expressed concern about the potential for conflict between cycles and coaches moving across the cycle lane to access the coach parking. Many of these were concerned about coaches crossing CS8 to move into the parking area, while a few respondents mentioned other concerns such risk of doors being opened into the path of the cycle lane and general proximity between coaches and cycles.

Pollution: 11 respondents (5%) expressed concern about increased levels of noise or air pollution as a result of increased coach movement or congestion, both through drivers searching for parking spaces and through increased coach movements on Millbank.

Location and facilities: 11 respondents (15%) expressed concern about being able pick up and drop off coach customers in a convenient place in central London, with some arguing that Millbank is less convenient than Victoria Embankment. Others felt Millbank to be a good replacement in terms of location. A small number of respondents expressed concern at the lack of public toilets on Millbank.

Request for bigger gap between coach bays and cycle lane: 8 respondents (4%) suggested that there should be more space between the CS8 cycle lane and the coach parking due to concerns about left-hand drive coaches offloading customers through the right-hand side door on to the cycle lane.

Impact of removing car parking: 5 respondents (2%) expressed concern about the removal of car parking spaces under the proposal. Some of this concern is due to the lack of detail about the relocation of some of the spaces removed.

Impact on pedestrians and visual environment: 4 respondents (2%) were concerned that a long stretch of continuous coach parking would make it harder for pedestrians to cross the road informally and would inhibit views of the river and conservation area.

4.4 Summary of responses from stakeholder groups and businesses

Local businesses, venues, trip attractors, developers

Motcomb Estates (Millbank Complex) Concerns: • Argues there is no requirement to provide the proposed coach parking along Millbank and that other locations across London would be more appropriate • Says proposals would damage important views both of and from the river, and would detract from future development aspirations and pedestrian improvements. It added that the Millbank Complex is being considered as a potential location for a national Holocaust memorial (partly due to its interaction with the river). • Concerned at continuous bay – saying it will encourage sloppy parking and thus poor use of space; or that drivers approaching from the north will have a poor view of availability and may choose to instead stop on double red lines or block the carriageway. • Concerned proposals would restrict pedestrian views of traffic and so impact on safety. • Concerned at potential for conflict between cyclists and coaches • Said pay and display parking is essential for the Millbank Complex, neighbouring Tate and the wider Millbank area (particularly for less mobile visitors). Says proposed new locations could create additional pressure in local streets and removes the ease of access for those reaching the Millbank Complex and Tate • Acknowledges demand for coach facilities to serve the neighbouring Tate Britain and potential future cultural use of the Millbank Complex

Suggestions: • A limited number of coach facilities bays should be retained along Millbank and others distributed throughout the local area (e.g. Atterbury Street, further south along Millbank and Vauxhall Bridge Road) • Any bays in the vicinity of Millbank should have a limited waiting period of between 20 minutes and one hour to provide short term set down and collection, with locations such as Albert Embankment or Nine Elms considered for longer- term provision • Any proposals for improvements along Millbank should promote a range of uses and modes and provide a high quality public realm

RCP Riverwalk House • Concerned at lack of information on the replacement of existing pay & display parking bays that would be displaced, noting that the provision of visitor parking in the area is important, especially in light of forthcoming developments such as Riverwalk • Question the appropriateness of providing such a large amount of coach parking in this particular location given the lack of crossing positions along Millbank

Tate Gallery • Strongly objects proposal due to perceived impact on the public realm, the pedestrian and historic environment and on key views, noting that the Tate is a Grade II* Listed Building and is located in the Millbank Conservation Area and in one of Westminster City Council’s Strategic Cultural Quarter. • Expressed concern that the proposal would detract from its strategy to improve public realm and access to the river, and Westminster City Council’s aim to prioritise the pedestrian environment. Suggests coach parking moved away from the river edge • Argues a continuous line of parked coaches would affect safety, access and legibility for pedestrians and would worsen existing sense of separation between Millbank and the river • Noted its aspiration for a new zebra crossing at the Tate • Concerned at potential for conflict between cyclists and coaches crossing the Cycle Superhighway • Suggested coach parking facilities are moved further out of the city. • Considers that pay and display bays provide an essential means of access for visitors to the Tate and the wider Strategic Cultural Area and highlights the potential impact on less mobile visitors. Requests any parking bays removed as part of this or other local schemes are replaced • Expressed concern at potential separate proposals affecting the operation of Atterbury Street

Coach and tour representative bodies:

Confederation of Passenger Transport UK • Repeated its concerns about the impact of the East-West Cycle Superhighway on coach operations and on tourism • Said proposal only replaces a relatively small amount of displaced parking and that relocation should have been included in the main consultation. Said proposal only includes 101.1m of new space • Said it is essential that alternative coach parking facilities are installed before bays are removed on Victoria Embankment • Said Millbank is remote from any facilities for passengers, meaning coaches will still need to set down passengers in more central locations. Also entails a return journey of approx. 3.5 miles to/from the Embankment, resulting in additional emissions, congestion and costs • Requested additional PUSD points in central locations more easily accessible from Millbank and offered to work with TfL and the respective London Boroughs to achieve this. • Said either costs will increase or length of stays in London reduce as tour parties adjust to fit around the logistical challenge imposed by these changes. • Concerned at lack of information on how long parking will be permitted in the new bays or the hours of operation, saying this was needed to make a reasoned assessment on the proposals. Urged a minimum of 45mins on any short term bays to allow for drivers legal rest requirements and requested further consultation with the industry • Stated importance of access to toilets, transport and refreshments for drivers. Suggested approaching Tate Britain to permit access on a formal basis

• Suggest more parking could be accommodated on Millbank. Suggestions on the southbound carriageway included a longer single lane stretch south of the pedestrian crossing, removing the central reservation and a shorter or time- restricted bus lane. Suggestions for the northbound carriageway include moving the Santander Cycles docking station further back from the carriageway or using some of the Tate Britain forecourt • Welcome all efforts to provide additional coach facilities and extend an offer to assist in this process, but are extremely concerned that the proposal on its own is not sufficient and that whilst other solutions likely exist, timescales could be lengthy.

European Tour Operator Association: Supports Millbank as an alternative to Victoria Embankment, but concerned that the number of spaces is reduced on what was available previously on the Embankment. Noted role of coaches in supporting tourism and making efficient use of road space.

Guild of British Coach Operators: Support the creation of additional coach parking space but consider that more still needs to be done to replace those lost as a result of the Cycle Superhighway

Coach and tour operators:

AC Tours: Upset at loss of bays on Embankment

Alfa Coaches Ltd: Support provision of parking but concerned that does not even make up for the loss of space on the Embankment

Angela Coaches Ltd: Welcome coach bays but concerned at potential for conflict between cyclists and coaches

Apple Travel Limited: Said that coach parking was needed due to current difficulties faced, given the role coaches play in tourism

Ardmore Language School: Concerned Millbank is less convenient than Victoria Embankment

Atbus: Said more parking space is needed

Barnes Coaches of Wiltshire: Noted “desperate” need for coach parking in London, noting importance of coaches to tourism.

Chalfont Coaches: Said provision on Millbank was necessary, adding that coaches played a role in reducing congestion and emissions but that parking provision is diminishing.

Chalkwell Coach Hire and Tours: Said coach parking is an important part of London's tourist business (noting its particular importance to passengers with impaired mobility) but is overlooked by TfL. Said finding parking and complying with driving hours legislation was challenging.

Chandlers Coach Travel: Said coach bays were needed. 14

City Circle UK Ltd: Said whilst this parking is needed and appreciated, it does not adequately replace that lost elsewhere as a result of the Cycle Superhighway.

Clarkes of London: Concerned that proposals do not adequately replace parking lost on Victoria Embankment when they did not meet demand to begin with. Noted that a lack of parking would increase congestion and that coaches play an important role in tourism.

Coach Logistics: Supportive, noting short supply of coach parking in the city. Suggested a time limit of 2 hours to allow driver breaks whilst discouraging longer layovers.

Dan’s Luxury Travel: Upset at loss of coach parking elsewhere, noting environmental impact of driving around seeking parking and pressure of driving time regulations. Suggested tourism and congestion will be affected. Also upset at condition and width of roads and behaviour of cyclists.

D & H Harrod Coaches Ltd: No comments

David Corbel of London Ltd: Said drop off and pickup points should also be taken into account as well as parking.

E Clarke & Son Coaches Ltd: Said parking for tourist coaches in central London is compromised, which could affect drivers’ ability to comply with driving time regulations.

Ebdons Tours: Supportive of proposed bays, but say they do not fully replace those removed from the Embankment. Said space for tour coaches was especially scarce and more provision is needed to help the industry survive in London.

Edwards Coaches Ltd: Suggested operating hours and restrictions echo those currently in effect on Victoria Embankment. Request "free" parking of up to 45 minutes to allow for the drivers legal break and suggest a similar facility on Albert Embankment.

Elgar Coaches: Said loss of parking and attention from traffic wardens was making London less attractive, which could impact on their ability to bring tourists to London. Noted drivers searching for parking created pollution.

Falcon Coaches: Said provision was “desperately needed” as drivers currently struggle to park and take legal breaks.

Farnham Coaches: Said bays removed from Victoria Embankment need to be replaced.

G2 Travel c/o Global Compass UK: Said it was working to increase tourism in London (noting the economic and environmental benefits of this) and needed Victoria Embankment bays to be replaced as soon as possible.

Golden Boy Coaches: Support proposal, but concerned that it does not fully replace bays lost on Victoria Embankment and may not be implemented by the time these bays are suspended.

Grayscroft Travel: Welcome any increase in coach parking, noting that drivers currently have to spend time driving around for spaces. Noted economic and environmental benefits of coach tourism to London.

Hearn's Coaches Support proposal, but request that bays lost on Victoria Embankment are fully replaced by the time work starts.

Hunsbury Coach Travel: Support new bays but request more to fully replace those lost.

JG Theatre Club Cordery Coach: Said proposals are vital and that two more bays could be provided on the other side of the road. Said a lack of coach parking and reduced road space threatened their business.

John Houghton Luxury Mini Coaches: Said there is unsufficient coach parking in London and suggested TfL install as many coach bays as is possible.

John Martin Coaches Ltd : Said proposals are essential for the coach tourism industry, given there are so few available in central London

Jones Motors (Login) Ltd: Said more provision was needed to fully replace provision lost on the Embankment and at Nine Elms

L J Edwards Coach & Car Hire: Request further provision to replace that lost on Victoria Embankment

Live Travel and Tours: Supportive, saying parking is essential to London tourism

London Pullman Tours Ltd: Said proposals were an acceptable alternative to Victoria Embankment but may not be enough.

Lucketts Travel: Supportive, saying proposals go some way to replacing those lost to the Cycle Superhighway. Stated importance of parking being as close to central London as possible, so that drivers can take breaks before collecting passengers. Noted economic value of coach industry and low cost of providing parking.

M&J Minibus Hire: Supportive, saying its drivers bring lots of tourists to London and should not have to struggle

M&S Coaches of Herefordshire Ltd: Welcomed proposals but said many more central parking facilities were needed, noting need for drivers to take legal rest breaks.

Motts Crusader Holidays: Supportive and requested bays are extended further.

MR 5 STAR COACH TRAVEL: Said proposals were essential to replace the current bays on Victoria Embankment which will be lost when the Cycle Superhighway is constructed. Noted environmental and economic benefits of coach parking.

P & J Ellis Ltd: Said safe and legal parking and loading is vital, noting increasing pressure on its operations due to reduced parking and driving time regulations. Highlighted role of coaches in London’s economy. place2B: Supportive, saying Millbank is a good replacement for Victoria Embankment. Requested new bays are available before the suspension at Victoria Embankment and that coaches can stay for a minimum of 1 hour so that drivers can use the bays for their break times. Noted lack of public toilets, suggesting that Tate Britain may need to be prepared for more visitors.

Redwing Coaches: Concerned proposals do not fully replace the bays lost on Victoria Embankment. Request that this is rectified, highlighting the importance of the tourist coach industry to central London and the City of Westminster

Reynolds Diplomat Coaches: Supportive, but request more bays provided for coaches to replace those which will be lost on the Embankment

Richardson Travel Ltd: Noted Embankment parking was already busy and would not be adequately replaced by the Millbank proposals.

Roadmark Travel: Acknowledge effort at replacing lost provision but say it is inadequate. Noted situation was exacerbated by loss of New Covent Garden parking and would make London less attractive to coach tourism, and add to congestion and pollution as coaches search for parking. Suggested an un-used purpose-built transport hub constructed in Royal Albert Way could provide 'out of town' coach parking.

Royale European Coaches: Said proposed bays are essential to the continued provision of coach services in London and that more are necessary for parking and stopping.

S-E-T Studienreisen GmbH: Supportive of proposing, saying that Millbank is a good replacement location for the Embankment. Requested that coaches can stay at least 1 hour to allow driver breaks and for public toilets to be available.

Safeguard Coaches Ltd: Supportive, noting economic benefits of coach tourism. Encourage other authorities to create more coach parking.

Scotland & Bates: Concerned that proposed provision doesn’t fully replace that being removed on Victoria Embankment and noted economic value of coach tourism. Also concerned at potential for conflict between coaches and cycles. Requested short-term parking bays to allow drivers to take breaks.

Sea View Coaches: Support the proposed new coach parking bays

Seaward Travel Limited: Said the new bays at Millbank should be in addition to Victoria Embankment bays rather than replacing them. Upset at decision to allocate space to cyclists and noted economic benefits of coach tourism.

Senlac Tours/Local Knowledge Tours: Supportive. Suggest bays on Embankment are biased towards pick-up/set-down facilities (especially 1730-1900) with a fairly short time limit whereas locations such as Millbank have a bias towards longer term 17 parking. Suggest charges do not radically undercut those of coach parks such as New Convent Garden so to encourage continued investment in off-street coach parking facilities.

Service Reisen Giessen, Heyne GmbH & Co KG: Concerned that the proposals do not fully replace parking being displaced from the Embankment and comment that the location is less convenient for central London. Also concerned at lack of toilets, cafes and shops. Add that difficulties faced by coach drivers in parking and taking breaks in London make it less attractive in comparison to other cities.

SHOWCOACH Tours: Supportive as parking is hard, and proposals would alleviate some of the problems to be caused by the removal of Embankment coach parking.

Skinners of Oxted: Say bays on Millbank are badly needed given existing difficulties parking in London which, it adds, make it difficult for drivers to adhere to driving time regulations and increase emissions.

Southgate and Finchley coaches: Welcome extra space for coach parking, especially considering recent losses

Stark Creations Ltd t/a Silver Screen Services: Welcome extra space for coach parking, especially considering recent losses

Stewarts Coaches: Support the proposal.

Tates Coaches: Welcome proposals but say they only go part way to replacing the loss of the bays on the Embankment and that more was needed to serve the thousands of tourists that the industry brings into London.

Terry Bushell Travel: Said it was important to replace lost bays on the Embankment, noting current parking difficulties due to lack of provision and driving hours restrictions.

The Travellers Choice: Expressed opposition to loss of coach parking.

Total Travel: Said there are currently not enough coach bays in London, meaning drivers spend time and fuel searching for space.

Trekkers Travel Ltd: Welcome any new provision for coach parking in central London is to be welcomed but say more is needed owing to losses on the Embankment and elsewhere. Noted pressure of driving hours regulations and potential impact on traffic and pollution of a scarcity of coach parking.

Venture Transport: Supportive but and request further bays to compensate for the overall loss of bays on the Victoria Embankment.

Westbus Coach Services Ltd: Said parking facilities should be provided for coaches, noting their importance to tourism

Westway Coach Services Ltd: Upset at loss of bays elsewhere and noted driving time regulations.

Other road user and transport groups

CTC London : Suggest buffer zone of at least 1 metre between coaches and the cycle lane to avoid passengers exiting foreign coaches in front of cyclists

Thames Clippers: Strongly support and welcome the interchange opportunity between river bus and coaches. Said it would be pleased to work together with the museum and coach operators to improve the customer experience for all.

5 Conclusion and next steps

We received 210 responses to our consultation on proposals to introduce new coach parking on Millbank.

There was strong support from the coach industry for the principle of providing more coach parking, with many respondents saying the proposals would go some way to compensating for the parking lost to the East-West Cycle Superhighway, although many felt that more provision was needed.

Permanent arrangements for coaches on Millbank Having considered the issues raised in the consultation, we have reconsidered our plans for permanent coach parking at this location. Our arrangements will therefore be to: 1. Formally permanently convert the bus stand opposite Thorney Street to four hour coach parking, and extend this new coach parking bay from 19 metres to 30 metres. 2. Extend the existing coach parking bay next to Millbank Pier from 39 metres to 45 metres. In total, this will provide an additional 36 metres of dedicated coach parking. These coach bays will be operated by Westminster City Council and will have a maximum stay of four hours. They will be installed with parking sensors to detect availability.

These revised arrangements would mean no permanent changes to the existing pay-by-phone parking at this location.

Temporary coach parking on Millbank in spring/summer 2015 To support the coach industry during construction of the East-West Cycle Superhighway, there is a short-term need to provide temporary additional coach parking as quickly as possible within reasonable distance of Victoria Embankment. We therefore intend to introduce our proposed coach parking temporarily from late May until late September 2015. The relevant pay-by-phone parking bays will be

19 suspended and coaches allowed to park there for this period. We have arranged for the temporary coach parking to be available on Millbank before bays on Victoria Embankment are suspended for construction of the East-West Cycle Superhighway.

Other permanent coach parking We will continue to work closely with the coach industry to identify and introduce additional permanent coach parking over the course of spring and summer 2015 to offset the provision lost to the East-West Cycle Superhighway.

TfL’s response to issues commonly raised in consultation is available in Appendix A.

Appendix A – TfL response to issues commonly raised

Issues relating to coaches

More coach parking needed in London TfL and the London boroughs work closely with the coach industry to ensure dedicated on-street facilities are provided at appropriate locations, where space permits on the London road network. In total, there are 672 coach parking facilities within Greater London, with around 57 per cent of these based within central London.

TfL acknowledges the role coaches play in London and the competing demands for London’s limited road space. In 2013, TfL launched the Tourist Coach Action Plan (TCAP[1]) with London boroughs and coach industry stakeholders, to address key coach issues and support coach operators and drivers. This has included trialling coach parking schemes to maximise the use of road space such as converting loading bays into mixed–use bays from summer 2015 and marshalling at key tourist attractions. We are also supporting initiatives such as the ‘Park and Glide’ scheme offered by Thames Clipper (http://www.thamesclippers.com/sightseeing-leisure/park-and-glide), which offers free coach parking outside central London in return for passengers using the river service to enter central London. TfL will be investigating further locations for such schemes, in conjunction with London River Bus operators.

As part of TCAP, we continue to work with the Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT) to review priority (pick up and set down) locations identified by their members. Where possible, we provide additional facilities or review the operating hours in line with coach drivers’ needs.

TfL also continues to work with local stakeholders and the coach industry to relocate coach parking removed from Victoria Embankment as part of the East-West Cycle Superhighway. As outlined in Section 5 of this report, we intend to formalise and expand existing coach parking on Millbank and introduce temporary coach parking here over spring and summer 2015 whilst coach parking is suspended on Victoria Embankment. Following this, 36 metres of new permanent coach parking will be provided.

We continue to work to identify and introduce other permanent coach parking facilities within reasonable distance of Victoria Embankment. We will also work with the Cycle Superhighway construction contractors to minimise coach parking suspensions as much as possible during works.

[1] http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/tourist-coach-action-plan.pdf

Impact on driving hour regulations Some respondents commented on the impact of relocating coach parking further away from Victoria Embankment. TfL strongly advises coach drivers to plan their visit to London in advance and provides the following planning tools to assist drivers: • Online coach parking map at www.tfl.gov.uk/coaches • Annual coach parking map (copies available by emailing [email protected]) • ‘Operating coaches in London’ leaflet • A free driver CPC course on operating coaches in London, which is provided by TfL.

The permanent Westminster City Council-controlled coach parking bays will be fitted with parking sensors to detect availability and measure utilisation. This information is available to view in real-time on Westminster City Council’s ParkRight app, to inform coach drivers’ decisions on where to seek parking and would help them plan their journeys.

Suggestions there is room for more coach parking on Millbank The concerns raised over the impact on pedestrians and the visual environment apply to Millbank in its entirety. Taking these and other factors into consideration, we do not currently consider it appropriate to install additional permanent coach parking elsewhere on Millbank. We are continuing to work with local stakeholders and the coach industry to temporarily relocate parking removed from Victoria Embankment and investigate further permanent coach parking solutions.

Pick up / set down provision While the East-West Cycle Superhighway will permanently remove some coach parking from Victoria Embankment, all dedicated provision for coaches to pick up and set down passengers is retained in its permanent layout, except bus/coach stop Y by Embankment Pier. We are working to secure a nearby replacement for this stop should we go ahead with our proposal to remove it in order to aid traffic flow. Some temporary closures to other stops may be required during construction, although we will work with the site contractor to minimise these as far as is possible.

Coaches can also pick up and set down passengers on double and single yellow lines on borough roads, at permitted borough bus stops and at TLRN bus stops.

Operating hours of coach bays Several respondents felt operating hours should be long enough to allow drivers to take the statutory 45 minute break. The coach bays on Millbank will be operated by Westminster City Council, which plans to extend the maximum stay to four hours, in keeping with other bays in the City of Westminster such as those on Kingsway.

Several different types of coach parking are used throughout London to fit the purpose of the area, such as provision adjacent to any major attractions which lack nearby facilities. The coach parking on Millbank is provided to allow drivers to take the statutory 45 minute break and wait for groups (e.g. schools, tourists), before picking up passengers closer to attractions.

Public toilets These coach bays are primarily intended as medium-term parking for coaches, not as facilities to drop off and pick up coach passengers. Therefore it is not expected that the bays will normally be used to set down or pick up passengers.

Issues relating to other road users

Impact on visual environment Several respondents, including local landowners, raised concerns over the impact on the visual environment of installing coach bays on Millbank. The revised proposal would retain a sizeable gap in coach parking, ensuring the river remains visible from the landside on Millbank for a greater stretch than under the previous proposal.

Impact on pedestrians Several respondents raised concerns that coach parking would create a barrier for pedestrians crossing Millbank. There is currently a signalised pedestrian crossing to the south of the bay, and a zebra crossing to the north at Lambeth Bridge. The revised proposal would have no impact on pedestrian crossing facilities here.

Cycle lane should run behind coach bays / request coach bay bypass for cyclists Currently, a mandatory cycle lane runs between the parking bays and general traffic lane on Millbank. The only vehicles permitted to cross the mandatory cycle lane are those pulling into or out of these parking bays. The parking bays are inset into the footway, meaning cyclists do not need to pull out of the cycle lane to pass stationary vehicles in these parking bays.

We would generally consider bus and coach bay bypasses where segregated cycle facilities are provided. However, there is insufficient width to provide a segregated cycle lane here. In order to introduce a coach bay bypass here, a segregating island between the coach bays and the cycle track would need to be installed. It would not be possible to provide adequate width for the cycle lane, coach parking bay, segregating island, general traffic lanes and footway within the highway boundary.

Conflict between cyclists and coaches Currently, both coaches and vehicles cross the cycle lane to pull into our out of the parking spaces. This would not change under the revised proposals. TfL has monitored the safety of the mandatory cycle lane on Millbank since it was installed as part of the Cycle Superhighway Route 8, and will continue to do so after the changes to coach parking here have taken place.

Request for more space between coach bay and cycle track These coach bays are primarily intended as medium-term parking for coaches, not as facilities to drop off and pick up coach passengers. Therefore it is not expected that the bays will normally be used to set down or pick up passengers.

The majority of coaches in London are right-hand drive. Passengers would alight from these coaches on the left hand side, directly onto the footway here. Just over 10% of all coaches in London are foreign. A small buffer is provided between the existing coach parking bays and cycle lane here currently, and this arrangement is not unusual in London. Furthermore, the coach parking is planned as long term (4 hour) provision, and peak usage is unlikely to overlap with the busiest cycling times.

We will continue to monitor the safety of this coach parking after the changes are implemented.

Removal of pay by phone parking bays The previous proposal included the removal of 13 paid parking bays from Millbank. The revised proposal makes use of largely single or double red lines to provide coach parking, so would now no longer result in the loss of paid parking bays here. Westminster City Council recently consulted on proposals to provide an additional four pay-by-phone and two shared-use parking bays in the local area.

Appendix B – Copy of consultation letter

Appendix C – Leaflet distribution area

Appendix D – List of stakeholders consulted Central London CTC Greater London Forum for Older People Central London Freight Quality Partnership Guild of British Coach Operators Ltd Chalkwell Harrowby and District Residents Association Chalkwell Garage & Coach Hire Ltd, Heart of London Business Alliance Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport HR Richmond Ltd t/a Quality Line, Chauffeur & Executive Assn ICOMOS UK Chauffeur and Executive Association Institute of Advanced Motorists Chelsea College J Brierley & E Barvela t/a Snowdrop Coaches Christopher Stephen Hunn t/a Travel with Jeremy Reese t/a The Little Bus Company, Hunny/TWH, CITY CRUISES PLC JLL (Millbank Tower) City of Westminster KING CRUISES Clarkes Land Securities Coach Driver Forum LCC Coach Logistics, Wye Valley Engineering Ltd. FSB Liberal Democrats COLLIERS LAUNCHES Licenced Private Hire Car Association Community Transport Association Licenced Taxi Drivers Association Confederation of Passenger Transport Licensed Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA) Cross River Partnership Line Line Coaches (TGM), CROWN RIVER CRUISES Living Streets Croydon Coaches (UK) Ltd t/a Coaches Excetera, Local Knowledge Tours CRUISE LONDON London Ambulance Service CTC London Cab Drivers' Club Ltd CTC London London Chamber of Commerce Cycling Embassy of Great Britain London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) Deloitte (Millbank Tower) London City Tour Department for Transport London Councils Department for Transport London Cycling Campaign (Westminster) DHL London Duck Tours Ltd Dial-a-Cab London First Disability Rights UK London General Disabled Motoring UK London Mencap E Clarke & Son (Coaches) Ltd, t/a Clarkes of London, LONDON PARTY BOATS East End Express (X1) London Private Hire Board English Heritage LONDON RIB VOYAGES Ensign Bus Company Ltd, LONDON RIVER CRUISES LTD. Federation of Small Businesses London Suburban Taxi Drivers' Coalition First Beeline London Taxi Drivers' Club London Tourist Coach Operators Association First Group (LTCOA) Freight Transport Association London TravelWatch GMB London United Busways Ltd Go-Ahead London London Visual Impairment Forum Go-Coach Hire Ltd LPHCA Golden Tours Marshalls Coaches 27

Greater London Authority Marylebone Association MAYNARD LAUNCHES Soho Society Megabus/Stagecoach Southbank Employers Group Metrobus Ltd, Stagecoach Metroline Ltd Students Union University of the Arts London Metropolitan Police - Community Police Sullivan Bus and Coach Ltd Metropolitan Police Service Sustrans Millbank Pier Tate Britain Millbank Tower Terravision Transport Ltd / Stansted Transport Ltd, Motorcycle Action Group (MAG) THAMES & ORWELL MARINE SERVICES National Autistic Society THAMES CLIPPERS National Express Ltd THAMES CRUISES National Motorcycle Council THAMES EXECUTIVE CHARTERS Neighbourcare St John's Wood & Maida Vale THAMES LEISURE New West End Company THAMES LIMO LTD Northbank BID THAMES LUXURY CHARTERS Northbank Guild THAMES RIB EXPERIENCE Olympus Bus & Coach THAMES RIVER SERVICES Original Tour Thames Tideway project ParcelForce The Association of Guide Dogs for the Blind Pimlico FREDA The Big Bus Company Ltd, Porcellio Ltd t/a Meridian Duck Tours, The British Motorcyclists' Federation Premium Coaches Ltd, The Ghost Bus Tours Ltd Purple Parking Ltd, The Kings Ferry Ltd, R Hearn t/a Hearn's Coaches, The Original London Sightseeing RAC The St Marylebone Society RAC Foundation for Motoring Thorney Island Society Radio Taxis TOPSAIL CHARTERS Red Rose Travel Tower Transit Operations Ltd Redwing (Evan Evans) Transport for All Redwing Coaches (Pullmanor Ltd), Tuckerman (Millbank Tower) REEDS RIVER CRUISES TURK LAUNCHES Reliance Travel, UKinbound Residents Society of Mayfair and St James's Unions Together Reynolds Diplomat Coaches Unite the Union RIB TOURS LONDON Victoria Business Improvement District RIVER THAMES BOAT HIRE VISCOUNT CRUISES/CAMPION LAUNCHES RMT Walk London RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People) Waltham Forest Cycling Campaign Road Danger Reduction Forum Wandsworth Community Transport Road Haulage Association Westminster City Council Roadpeace WESTMINSTER PARTY BOATS Royal Mail Westminster Safer Transport Team Royal National Institute of Blind People Westminster Society Sardar Ali Khan t/a Red Eagle, WOODS RIVER CRUISES SCOPE www.silvercanetours.com

Ends