DOCSLIB.ORG

Consultation Report March 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Park Lane coach parking

Consultation report March 2016

Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 2 12345
Background ................................................................................................................ 3 The consultation ......................................................................................................... 4 Overview of consultation responses............................................................................ 6 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders........................................... 7 Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 8
Appendix A – Copy of the consultation material .................................................................... 9 Appendix B – letter distribution area.................................................................................... 11 Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted ....................................................................... 12 Appendix D – List of themes raised during consultation....................................................... 18 Appendix E – response to issues raised.............................................................................. 19

Executive Summary

About the consultation:

In November 2015 we consulted on proposals to introduce an additional 45 metres of coach parking on the north side of Park Lane. This proposed extension to existing coach parking would replace some of the coach parking that was removed from Victoria Embankment because of the East-West Cycle Superhighway.

Overall, we received 104 responses, with 65% of those supporting or partially supporting the scheme. Positive comments included general support for additional coach parking provision in London. Negative comments included concern that a nearby bus stop was being moved too away from the subway entrance/exit.

Conclusion and next steps:

Having considered the responses received, we will proceed with extending the coach parking bays on Park Lane. However, as the main concern raised during consultation was the distance between the bus stop and the subway entrance, we will instead introduce a 30 metre coach parking bay instead of the originally-proposed 45 metre bay. This would still provide additional coach parking, whilst allowing the bus stop to stay closer to the subway entrance, meaning bus passengers would have less of a distance to walk

Additionally, the consultation proposed that the additional parking spaces would become operational from 08:30 each day. In order for the new coach parking bays to mirror those already on Park Lane northbound, the operational hours will be changed to allow coaches to park from 08:00 each day. There will be no change to the charging hours.

We plan to extend the coach bay by the end of Spring 2016.

2

1 Background

We identified a location on Park Lane for an additional 45 metres of coach parking. This proposed extension to existing coach parking would replace some of the coach parking that was removed from Victoria Embankment because of the East-West Cycle Superhighway.

We proposed to extend the existing paid coach parking bays on the west (northbound) side of Park Lane by 45 metres, which would provide space for three additional large coaches. The existing bus stop would be moved north, closer to Grosvenor Gate.

We proposed that the additional parking spaces would operate in the same way as the existing coach parking on Park Lane northbound:



Coaches would be allowed to park from 08:30 to midnight each day Charges levied by Westminster City Council will apply from 08:30 to 18:30 Monday to Friday and from 08:30 to 13:30 on Saturday

Coaches would be allowed to park for a maximum of two hours during operating times and would not be permitted to return within one hour

1.1 Scheme location

3

2 The consultation

This consultation was designed to enable us to understand local opinion about the proposed changes to the coach parking on Park Lane. The consultation ran for a 4½week period, from Friday 20 November to Tuesday 22 December 2015.

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 because of issues raised in the consultation

2.1 Consultation objectives

The objectives of the consultation were:  To provide easily-understandable information about our proposals and allow consultees to respond
 To understand the level of support or opposition for our proposals  To understand any issues which we were not previously aware of that might affect our proposals
 To understand concerns and objections  To allow consultees to make suggestions  To inform our decision making process

2.2 Who we consulted

The public consultation intended to seek views of those living or working close to, Park Lane. We also asked for the views of local and London-wide stakeholders.

We consulted the following:



Residents Local businesses Road user groups Cyclists Metropolitan Police Westminster City Council officers and elected members London Councils Living Streets London TravelWatch Coach industry trade associations Other external stakeholders

A full list of stakeholders and organisations we consulted is included in appendix C and a summary of their responses is in section 6.

4

2.3 Consultation material, distribution and publicity

The consultation was published online where a dedicated webpage included the details and background to the proposal. A copy of the website can be seen in appendix A.

We raised awareness of the consultation by distributing letters to 280 addresses in the surrounding area (see appendix B) with details of the scheme. All our printed material directed respondents to our website, although we also listed Freepost and

email addresses for those who preferred to write in. Our contact centre’s phone

number was also included if people had any enquiries. We also targeted registered oyster card holders who regularly used bus services along Park Lane. The email went to 20,133 people who use bus routes along Park Lane. These routes are: 2, 10, 16, 36, 73, 74, 82, 137, 148, 414, 436, N16, N73, N74 and N137

People were invited to respond to the consultation using a variety of methods. They could respond by emailing us at [email protected], by post to a Freepost address or by accessing the online consultation and survey via a website link:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/park-lane-coaches (see appendix A).

5

3 Overview of consultation responses

Overall, we received a total of 104 responses to the consultation, 103 of these were received online and one was received by letter. The responses included submissions from local authorities, members of the coach industry, bus users, and local stakeholders.

A breakdown of the number of responses by respondent type is shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Consultation responses by respondent

  • Respondent
  • Number

Members of the public Stakeholders
101
3

The first question asked ‘Do you support the proposal for additional coach parking on

Park Lane?’

Table 2: Answers received to Question 1 – Do you support the proposal for additional coach parking on Park Lane?

Do you support the proposed scheme?

Support

Number Percentage

56 12
3
54% 11%
3%
Partially support No opinion

  • Not sure
  • 6
  • 6%

Don’t support

Not answered
27
0
26%
0%

Do you support the proposal for additional coach parking on Park Lane?

60 50 40 30 20 10
0

Partially support
No opinion
Not answered

Don’t

support

  • Support
  • Not sure

  • Percentage (%)
  • 54%

56
11%
12
3%
3
6%
6
26%
27
0%

  • 0
  • Number of responses

6

The second question was open and asked, ‘Do you have any comments on the proposal for extending the coach parking bays on Park Lane?’ Comments received were wide ranging, and the top five most common themes and issues raised are in the table below.

Table 3: Common themes arising from consultation

  • Theme/Issue
  • Number

Support: the reallocation of spaces lost from East-West Cycle Superhighway
24
Concern: the bus stop was moving too far from the subway entrance Oppose: the proposal
17 12

  • 9
  • Support: more coach parking needed

  • Concern: traffic on Park Lane
  • 9

4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders

Three stakeholders responded to the consultation. A summary of their responses is below:

London Tourist Coach Operators Association (LTCOA)

LTCOA fully supported the proposals for Park Lane.

Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT)

CPT fully supported the proposal, and outlined the benefit these bays would have for the coach industry. CPT also explained the adverse affect the loss of the coach bays on the East – West Cycle Superhighway was having on the industry.

The CPT also raised the issue of a significant loss of overnight coach parking in central London, resulting from the removal of the facility at New Covent Garden Market and the possible removal from Warwick Road coach park. The CPT felt that Park Lane offered an ideal location for overnight coach parking as there was minimal activity in the area that overnight parking would disrupt.

British Motorcyclists Federation (BMF)

The BMF supported the proposal and commented that it was a good use of space.

7

5 Conclusion

The consultation intended to seek views of those living or working close to, Park Lane. The consultation ran for a 4½-week period, from Friday 20 November to Tuesday 22 December 2015. Overall, we received 104 responses, with 65% of those supporting or partially supporting the scheme.

Decision

Having considered the responses received, we will proceed with extending the coach parking bays on Park Lane. However, as the main concern raised during consultation was the distance between the bus stop and the subway entrance, we will instead introduce a 30 metre coach parking bay instead of the originally- proposed 45 metre bay. This would still provide additional coach parking, whilst allowing the bus stop to stay closer to the subway entrance, meaning bus passengers would have less of a distance to walk.

Additionally, the consultation proposed that the additional parking spaces would become operational from 08:30 each day. In order for the new coach parking bays to mirror those already on Park Lane northbound, the operational hours will be changed to allow coaches to park from 08:00 each day. There will be no change to the charging hours.

The consultation also proposed enlarging the existing bus stop shelter. However, as the existing shelter size was adequate for the number of passengers this is no longer necessary.

We plan to extend the coach bay by the end of Spring 2016.

8

Appendix A – Copy of the consultation material

  • 9
  • 10

Appendix B – letter distribution area

11

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted

London TravelWatch

Elected Members

Andrew Boff AM Caroline Pidgeon AM Darren Johnson AM Fiona Twycross AM Gareth Bacon AM Jenny Jones AM Joanne McCartney AM Kit Malthouse AM Murad Qureshi AM Nicky Gavron AM Richard Tracey AM Stephen Knight AM Tom Copley AM Valerie Shawcross AM

  • Karen Buck MP
  • Westminster North

  • Mark Field MP
  • Cities of London and Westminster

Knightsbridge & Belgravia, WCC Knightsbridge & Belgravia, WCC Knightsbridge & Belgravia, WCC West End, WCC
Cllr Anthony Devenish Cllr Philippa Roe Cllr Rachael Robathan Cllr Glenys Roberts

  • Cllr Jonathan Glanz
  • West End, WCC

12

  • Cllr Paul Church
  • West End, WCC

Local Authorities

Greater London Authority (GLA) London Councils Royal Parks Westminster City Council

Police & Health Authorities

London Ambulance Service London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority Metropolitan Police Service Westminster Safer Transport Team

Transport Groups

AA DriveTech AA Motoring Trust Association of British Drivers Association of Car Fleet Operators Automobile Association (AA) Better Transport British Motorcyclists Federation Chartered Institution of Highways & Transportation (CIHT) Confederation of Passenger Transport Department for Transport Disabled Motoring UK Freight Transport Association (FTA)

13

Transport Groups

Green Flag Group Licenced Taxi Drivers Association London Tourist Coach Operators Association Motorcycle Action Group Motorcycle Industry Association RAC Foundation for Motoring Road Haulage Association (RHA) Transport Focus Transport for All

Local Interest Groups

Baker Street Quarter Partnership Ltd Bayswater Residents Association Belgravia Residents Association Fitzrovia Neighbourhood Association Fitzrovia Partnership Heart of London Business Alliance BID Marylebone Association New West End Company (NWEC) Paddington BID Paddington Residents Active Concern On Transport (PRACT) Residents Society of Mayfair and St James's South East Bayswater Residents Association Westminster Society

Other stakeholders

14

Other stakeholders

Action on Hearing Loss (RNID) Age Concern London Age UK Alzheimer's Society Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance Association of Disabled Professionals Balfour Beatty plc British Hospitality Association (BHA) BT Campaign for Better Transport Campaign for Clean Air in London Canal & River Trust London CCG Central London (WESTMINSTER) CCG NHS Central London Confederation of British Industry (CBI) CTC, the national cycling charity Disability Alliance Disability Rights UK Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee EDF Energy Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) Greater London Forum for the Elderly Guide Dogs Historic Royal Palaces Independent Disability Advisory Group (IDAG) Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE)

15

Other stakeholders

Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS)

Joint Mobility Unit Living Streets London and Partners London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) London Cycling Campaign London Cycling Campaign (Westminster) London First London Visual Impairment Forum (LVIF) MENCAP Merlin Entertainments Group MIND Multiple Sclerosis Society Muscular Dystrophy Campaign National Autistic Society National Children's Bureau National Grid Network Rail Infrastructure Limited Parkinson's UK RMT Union RNIB Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) Royal Mail SCOPE Sense

16

Other stakeholders

Sixty Plus Stroke Association Sustrans Thames Water The British Dyslexia Association Unions Together Unite Union Visit Britain

17

Appendix D – List of themes raised during consultation

Concern

  • Concern: accessibility
  • 4

1

Concern: coaches shouldn’t be in central London

Concern: cyclists in main carriageway Concern: reduced visibility
25
Concern: stop moving too far from subway entrance Concern: traffic on Park Lane
17
9
Concern: visual impact of coaches and buses

Oppose

4

  • Oppose: the proposal
  • 12

Suggestions

Suggestion: reduce from 3 bays to 2 bays Suggestion: 20mph
112329111
Suggestion: better enforcement Suggestion: coach parking between stop and car park ramp Suggestion: increase parking time Suggestion: not scheme related Suggestion: park and ride for coaches Suggestion: seasonal coach parking restrictions Suggestion: UK registered coaches only

Support

Support: more coach parking needed Support: the proposal
9
24

18

Appendix E – response to issues raised

Below are our responses to the most commonly raised issues.

The proposal makes the distance between the subway and bus stop too far

The proposal initially moved the bus stop north by 45 metres. As a result of the concerns about the increased walking distance from the bus stop to the subway this will be reduced to 30 metres.

The proposal will add to traffic on Park Lane

Some respondents were worried that this would increase traffic on Park Lane. As this proposal only sees an addition of two coach parking bays to the existing 20 coach parking bays on Park Lane northbound, there is unlikely to be any noticeable increase in traffic along this already busy section of road.

More coach parking is needed

Some respondents commented that more coach parking was required in London. The additional coach parking on Park Lane is principally to replace some of the coach parking bays removed from Victoria Embankment. TfL is nonetheless working with the coach industry trade associations and local authorities to improve the provision of coach parking across London.

The proposal will reduced visibility of the bus stop

Some concerns were raised that the additional parking would reduce visibility of the bus stop. As the proposal does not change the size of the bus stop, only the position, the additional coach parking should not have any impact on the existing arrangements.

Visual impact of buses and coaches

Park Lane is already a busy road, with three traffic lanes in each direction and 20 existing coach parking bays on the northbound carriageway. We therefore feel the addition of two additional coach parking bays will not have a significant impact on the existing views.

19

Recommended publications
  • Margarethe Theseira POTENTIAL

    Margarethe Theseira POTENTIAL

    TRADING PLACES: MAXIMISING LONDON’S EXPORTS Theseira Margarethe POTENTIAL TRADING PLACES: MAXIMISING LONDON’S EXPORTS POTENTIAL Margarethe Theseira Published by Centre for London, November 2014 Open Access. Some rights reserved. As the publisher of this work, Centre for London wants to encourage the circulation of our work as widely as possible while retaining the copyright. We therefore have an open access policy which enables anyone to access our content online without charge. Anyone can download, save, perform or distribute this work in any format, including translation, without written permission. This is subject to the terms of the Centre for London licence. Its main conditions are: · Centre for London and the author(s) are credited · This summary and the address www.centreforlondon.org are displayed · The text is not altered and is used in full · The work is not resold · A copy of the work or link to its use online is sent to Centre for London. You are welcome to ask for permission to use this work for purposes other than those covered by the licence. Centre for London gratefully acknowledges the work of Creative Commons in inspiring our approach to copyright. To find out more go to www.creativecommons.org Published by: Centre for London 2014 © Centre for London. Some rights reserved. The Exchange 28 London Bridge Street London, SE1 9SG T: 020 3102 3767 [email protected] www.centreforlondon.org Company Number: 8414909 Charity Number: 1151435 Typeset by Soapbox, www.soapbox.co.uk Centre for London is a politically independent, not‑for‑profit think tank focused on the big challenges facing London.
  • THE FUTURE of SMART Harnessing Digital Innovation to Make London the Best City in the World UPDATE REPORT of the SMART LONDON PLAN (2013)

    THE FUTURE of SMART Harnessing Digital Innovation to Make London the Best City in the World UPDATE REPORT of the SMART LONDON PLAN (2013)

    THE FUTURE OF SMART Harnessing digital innovation to make London the best city in the world UPDATE REPORT OF THE SMART LONDON PLAN (2013) MARCH 2016 THE FUTURE OF SMART: UPDATE REPORT OF THE SMART LONDON PLAN COPYRIGHT Greater London Authority March 2016 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 Cover: KPMG Data Observatory © Data Science Institute, Imperial College London 3 railways’ expansion as London doubled MAYOR’S in size in the space of just 30 years. Today, as we plan for over 10 million FOREWORD citizens in 2036, London is again showing how the power of data and technology can help support growth. Our tech industry is renowned for its innovation and entrepreneurial energy. That is why investment in the sector is so high – ten times more than just five years ago. We have been working hard at City Hall to open up London’s data and build new tools to see how to best deal with our growing capital. Working closely with Londoners, industry and the Smart London Board, we are doing all we can to ensure London takes advantage of the opportunities presented London is a digital world leader. For by technology – both now and in the future. some, innovation in technology is about I would like to give a special thanks to the sheer speed and amount of data we the Smart London Board for building and carry with us in our smartphones. Yet it keeping the momentum going.
  • Case Study City Information Centre Mobile Working

    Case Study City Information Centre Mobile Working

    01 Case Study City Information Centre Mobile Working City Information Centre Street Guides City Information Centre Mobile Working | Case Study | 02 The City Information Centre’s (CIC) outreach activities aligns with VisitEngland’s Strategic Framework Objective 4, to facilitate greater engagement between the visitor and the experience. It also contributes to VisitEngland’s Destination Management Action Plan by helping to ensure the availability of world class, tailored information at every stage of the visitor journey and supporting 5% growth, year-on-year in the England tourism market by 2020. In the run up to the 2012 Games, the City Information Centre The CIC was also aware that as the only official tourist became increasingly aware of the requirement to deliver information centre in central London and the only one visitor information to people where and when they needed it, promoting wider London and national product, it was the rather than expecting them to search out the Centre. In 2012, capital’s expert for visitor information and there was a real this was on-street at the major events the City was hosting. opportunity to shine. A previous local volunteer scheme which provided information The solution lay in the asset that the City of London helpers on-street (the SquareMilers) did not offer a feasible Corporation (CoL) has in its staff. The CIC - which is provided solution at the time, as the City has a low resident population by CoL - has only a small staff, but the wider organisation (9k) and a large Monday to Friday working one (380k). employs some 3,000+ across its departments and functions Potential volunteers from various communities which had (including the City of London Police).
  • West End Commission Final Report April 2013

    West End Commission Final Report April 2013

    West End Commission Final Report April 2013 WEST END COMMISSION Contents Foreword from the Chair 03 Summary of recommendations 04 About the Commission 09 About the West End 15 Governance and Leadership 26 Growth 35 • Transport 36 • Non-transport infrastructure 43 • Business 46 Place 51 • Crime, safety, night-time economy and licensing 52 • Environment 56 • Heritage and culture 59 • Marketing and promotion 61 People 63 • Housing 64 • Employment and skills 68 Annex 1: Primary data sources 71 Annex 2: Acknowledgements 71 Foreword from the Chair I have been a passionate promoter of cities as engines of national growth throughout my career. When I was invited to chair the independent West End Commission, I saw it as an opportunity to learn more myself about what makes successful places tick, but also to create a platform for serious debate to support the long-term success of a key national asset. This report is the culmination of many months of hard work by a number of people who have given up their time freely to listen, learn and discuss how the West End can respond to the challenges it faces, so that the area remains an attractive place to live and work and in addition, achieves world class excellence in corporate, visitor and enterprise activities. Fiscal restraint is a challenge for many places and not just the West End. So is the co-ordination of public services. What is different in the West End is not just the scale of the challenges, but also the need to tackle effectively the externalities which are associated with success.
  • London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study

    London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study

    Working Paper 61 London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study Brian Smith and Elisa Conti (London & Partners) July 2014 London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study Working Paper 61 copyright Greater London Authority July 2014 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queens Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk Tel 020 7983 4922 Minicom 020 7983 4000 ISBN 978-1-84781-577-4 Cover photograph © Daryl Rozario For more information about this publication, please contact: GLA Economics Tel 020 7983 4922 Email [email protected] GLA Economics provides expert advice and analysis on London’s economy and the economic issues facing the capital. Data and analysis from GLA Economics form a basis for the policy and investment decisions facing the Mayor of London and the GLA group. GLA Economics uses a wide range of information and data sourced from third party suppliers within its analysis and reports. GLA Economics cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or timeliness of this information and data. The GLA will not be liable for any losses suffered or liabilities incurred by a party as a result of that party relying in any way on the information contained in this report. London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study Working Paper 61 Contents Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3 2.
  • Destination London: the Expansion of the Visitor Economy

    Destination London: the Expansion of the Visitor Economy

    CHAPTER 1 Destination London: An Expanding Visitor Economy Andrew Smith Introduction No city in the world is better covered by literature – fictional and non-fictional – than London. From Pepys, via Dickens, to Ackroyd, London has benefited from a series of talented historians, novelists and commentators who have provided detailed accounts of the city’s condition. In the past few years a new tranche of books has been published on the contemporary character of the UK capital: with Anna Minton’s Big Capital, Rowan Moore’s Slow Burn City, Ben Judah’s This is London and Iain Sinclair’s The Last London notable examples. One thing that unites these otherwise excellent accounts is the conspicuous absence of discussions about the city’s visitor economy. This is a notable omission, given the scale and significance of tourism in London. Over the years, the city has earned various nicknames that purport to represent its essential nature: ‘the great wen’; ‘the big smoke’; ‘the city of villages’. But the epithet that perhaps best represents contemporary London might be: ‘the city of tourists’ or Destination London. London hosts a very significant visitor economy and overnight visitors contribute approximately £14.9 billion of expenditure to the city every year How to cite this book chapter: Smith, A. 2019. Destination London: An Expanding Visitor Economy. In: Smith, A. and Graham, A. (eds.) Destination London: The Expansion of the Visitor Economy. Pp. 1–13. London: University of Westminster Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16997/ book35.a. License: CC-BY-NC-ND 2 Destination London (London and Partners 2017).
  • Jobs & Growth Plan

    Jobs & Growth Plan

    JOBS AND GROWTH PLAN FOR LONDON JOBS AND GROWTH PLAN FOR LONDON APRIL 2013 COPYRIGHT Greater London Authority April 2013 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN Photographs © Copies of this report are available in PDF format from www.london.gov.uk JOBS AND GROWTH PLAN FOR LONDON CONTENTS Foreword by the Co-Chairs of the Panel & the Mayor of London…….….…4 Executive Summary……………………………………………………….…7 Chapter 1 London, A Tale of Two Cities…………….………………………8 Chapter 2 Priorities for the London Enterprise Panel…………………...…12 2.1 Skills and employment…………………………….……….…..14 2.2 Small and medium enterprises……………………………........21 2.3 Sector focus: digital creative, science and technology……..….27 2.4 Infrastructure……………………………………………….....34 Appendices…………………………………………………………......…40 Appendix 1: The role of the Mayor in London Appendix 2: Funding and the LEP Appendix 3: Skills & Employment Devolution, the future? Appendix 4: Members of the London Enterprise Panel Appendix 5: Stakeholders consulted on the LEP’s Jobs & Growth Strategy Appendix 6: Glossary Appendix 7: References JOBS AND GROWTH PLAN FOR LONDON 4 FOREWORD Our task is simple. First we must create opportunities for as many Londoners as possible to become economically active as soon as possible. Second we must start to fit the city for the future, helping it to adapt to a global economy that can shift jobs and capital across time zones in a matter of weeks. These twin objectives require strategic focus, and I hope that is what you will find in this document.
  • London & Partners and GLA Present the Mayor of London's

    London & Partners and GLA Present the Mayor of London's

    London & Partners and GLA present the Mayor of London’s “London Is Open” Campaign ICCA Best Marketing Award Campaign Awards Submission 2016 SUMMARY OF CAMPAIGN A major city wide marketing campaign spearheaded by the Mayor of London to show that London is united and open for business to the world following the EU referendum result. #LondonIsOpen shows the world that London remains entrepreneurial, international, and full of creativity and possibility, while reassuring the more than one million foreign nationals who live in London that they will always be welcome, and that any form of discrimination will not be tolerated. - What were the marketing challenges being addressed? BACKGROUND: June 23rd 2016 – the UK referendum results closely voted in favour of the UK leaving the EU. (52%, for 48% against) London voted overwhelmingly in favour of remaining (at 60%) within the EU, and there was a sense of disbelief (even amongst many of the leave voters who didn’t believe they would actually win) around the result. Whilst London & Partners and the GLA were prepared with actions and priorities to tackle whichever way the vote went, we very quickly realised we needed to address immediate negative concerns around London remaining a welcoming city in which to live, work, study, invest and visit. We realised there were global concerns from all areas and we needed to move quickly to start to allay fears for the future, and to start sending positive messages out across a multitude of channels, and it had to be fast. The very real risk we faced were businesses no longer seeing London as a destination for their business events, entrepreneurs and corporations no longer wanting to set up offices here, visitors no longer wanting to visit, and students no longer wanting to study here.
  • Handbook 2014

    Handbook 2014

    2014 Handbook genesis 2014 INNOVATE DEVELOP EXPAND IN FLANDERS Meet us at the session on ‘The role and impact of nano-electronics in healthcare and life science research’ by Dr. Liesbet Lagae, Associate Professor at K.U. Leuven and Head of R&D at IMEC. IMEC is Flanders’ world-leading independent research centre for nano-electronics applied in future healthcare needs. Visit us at stand no. 31 and find out what Flanders Investment and Trade can do for you and your company! INVESTINFLANDERS.COM Sponsors 3 Genesis 2014 Sponsors Platinum Sponsors Contents Welcome 6 Plenary Speakers 7 - 8 Speakers 8 - 21 Gold Sponsors Programme 22 - 23 Floor Plan and Exhibitor List 24 - 25 The Source Lounge 29 - 32 Silver Sponsors Exhibitors 33 - 45 Corporate Patron Corporate Sponsors Bronze Sponsors INNOVATE Partners DEVELOP EXPAND IN FLANDERS Supporters Meet us at the session on ‘The role and impact of nano-electronics in healthcare and life science research’ by Dr. Liesbet Lagae, Associate Professor at K.U. Leuven and Head of R&D at IMEC. IMEC is Flanders’ world-leading independent research centre for nano-electronics applied in future healthcare needs. Media Partners Visit us at stand no. 31 and find out what Flanders Investment and Trade can do for you and your company! INVESTINFLANDERS.COM EDINBURGH BIOQUARTER Scotland. The home of INSPIRING Whisky and the Bionic Hand. LOCATION We’re the toast of the Edinburgh BioQuarter is an academic medical centre scientifi c community. with a focus on interdisciplinary research and translational medicine, with particular strengths in regenerative medicine and connected health.
  • A Review of the London and Partners Process of Selection of Trade Mission Delegates and Decisions About Sponsorship

    A Review of the London and Partners Process of Selection of Trade Mission Delegates and Decisions About Sponsorship

    A Review of the London and Partners Process of Selection of Trade Mission Delegates and decisions about Sponsorship A. Context 1. There have been two previous substantive reviews of London and Partners' governance arrangements since 2016, one instigated by the GLA, the other by London and Partners, with resulting action plans and the implementation of recommended changes. Following various allegations in the media in September 2019 regarding past matters, the Mayor of London has commissioned this independent review of current practices at London and Partners in relation to two specific areas, namely the selection of delegates for Trade Missions and decisions about commercial sponsorship. This review has taken place with the agreement of London and Partners. B. Terms of the Review as set by the Mayor of London 2. The terms of this independent review were set by the Mayor of London on 15th October 2019; A. To review the current processes in place at London and Partners (and any GLA involvement in them) in relation to i) determining delegates on Trade Missions ii) deciding commercial sponsorship of external events and organisations B. To review a sample of the application of those processes in practice in the last 12 months C. To make recommendations as appropriate 1 C. Review process 3. This is a review of the processes in place at the current time and it is based on information available at the time of writing. This report is provided following a review of documents attached as appendices to this report (or referred to in the report by web link), a review of the London and Partners website, and having had sight of various on line case management tools and electronic spread sheets.
  • Why Government Expenditure Cuts Are Necessary

    Why Government Expenditure Cuts Are Necessary

    Working Paper 61 London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study Brian Smith and Elisa Conti (London & Partners) July 2014 London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study Working Paper 61 copyright Greater London Authority July 2014 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queens Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk Tel 020 7983 4922 Minicom 020 7983 4000 ISBN 978-1-84781-577-4 Cover photograph © Daryl Rozario For more information about this publication, please contact: GLA Economics Tel 020 7983 4922 Email [email protected] GLA Economics provides expert advice and analysis on London’s economy and the economic issues facing the capital. Data and analysis from GLA Economics form a basis for the policy and investment decisions facing the Mayor of London and the GLA group. GLA Economics uses a wide range of information and data sourced from third party suppliers within its analysis and reports. GLA Economics cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or timeliness of this information and data. The GLA will not be liable for any losses suffered or liabilities incurred by a party as a result of that party relying in any way on the information contained in this report. London & Partners Evaluation Methodology Study Working Paper 61 Contents Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3 2.
  • CRP New Starter

    CRP New Starter

    All of the latest news from CRP and its partners View this email in your browser July 2017 Delivering London's Future Together Welcome to the Cross River Partnership monthly e•bulletin CRP New Starter Anisha George has joined CRP’s Deliver London team as a Business Engagement Officer. Anisha will be working on our deliverBEST programme, supporting businesses to make their deliveries more efficient and reduce their environmental impact. Prior to CRP Anisha worked at Green Alliance as a policy assistant. She has also worked in the renewable energy sector in Tanzania and Canada. For more information contact CRP's Anisha George. Marylebone LEN CRP are managing the delivery of the Marylebone Low Emission Neighbourhood (LEN) programme on a part•time interim basis, on behalf of Westminster City Council and its partners. We are pleased to be supported by the secondment of Andy Martin, kindly provided to the LEN by TfL for one day a week. CRP are thrilled to be involved with this exciting Mayors' Air Quality Funded programme, which is increasing provision of electric vehicle charging; improving public realm; greening; raising awareness and reducing the number of diesel vehicles coming to the area. The Marylebone LEN has recently been commended for a New London Award in the category of Wellbeing. For information visit www.marylebonelen.org or contact Vicky Keeble. CRP is also supporting the delivery and servicing programme in the LEN, and want to speak to businesses in the area. For more information contact Amandeep Kellay. UDL Event on central London: its streets and public spaces Subscribe Past Issues Translate CRP was honoured to present a session on ‘Walking’ at this well­attended Urban Design London (UDL) conference on 11th July 2017.