Transport for London

Mayor’s Transport Strategy Local Implementation Plan Guidance July 2004

MAYOR OF LONDON Transport for London

Boroughs can contact TfL for advice on this guidance in the following ways:

LIPs, Borough Partnerships, Transport for London, Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL

For the attention of: Mark Bennett, Head of Group Borough Funding

Email: [email protected] Phone: 020 7941 4915 Fax: 020 7941 4725

LIP submission information is set out in 3.1, page 9. LIP Guidance 2004 1

Foreword I set out priorities for improving transport in London in my Transport Strategy. The boroughs have a key role to play in planning for and delivering these improvements, particularly in managing the 95 percent of London’s roads for which they are responsible. This guidance is aimed at assisting boroughs to prepare Local Implementation Plans which will help ensure well integrated delivery of the Transport Strategy at the local level.

Boroughs will need to take account of their local context in developing their Local Implementation Plans, to take forward the Transport Strategy in an appropriate and effective way. My key priorities for local transport are re-stated in the guidance. These are complemented by statutory targets that I have set for implementation of the Transport Strategy. These give a clear indication of the pace of delivery that I expect.

TfL will seek to continue to assist boroughs through the process of preparation and delivery of Local Implementation Plans. I will also continue work with the boroughs and the Association of London Government to seek the additional resources we need to improve transport in London.

I would like to thank all of the boroughs and others who helped improve this document through their comments on the draft Guidance.

I look forward to receiving completed borough Local Implementation Plans during 2005, and to the contribution that delivery of these plans will make towards the local transport improvements that London needs.

Ken Livingstone Mayor of London 2 Transport for London

Local Implementation Plan Guidance List of contents 1. Introduction 5 2. Local Implementation Plans: function and content 7 2.1 LIP function and scope 7 2.2 Key deliverables for LIPs 7 2.3 Purpose of LIPs guidance 7 3. LIP process 9 3.1 Major milestones 9 3.2 LIPs funding and resourcing 10 3.2.1 Central Government funding 11 3.2.2 BSP funding 12 3.2.3 Changes to BSP process 13 3.2.4 Role of sub-regional partnerships 14 3.2.5 Other TfL funding for boroughs 15 3.3 Consultation of the LIP 15 3.4 LIP evaluation 16 3.4.1 LIP evaluation framework 16 3.5 Legal framework and issues 17 3.5.1 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 17 3.5.2 Traffic Management Bill 17 4. Mayor’s Transport Strategy and key priorities 19 4.1 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy 19 4.2 The Mayor’s priority areas for borough implementation and related targets 19 4.3 The LIP guidance ‘matrix’ 19 4.4 The Map of ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes 20 4.5 Cross-cutting goals 20 4.5.1 Balancing needs for road-space allocation 20 5. LIP monitoring and performance indicators 27 5.1 Borough progress reports on LIPs 27 5.2 Performance indicators 28 5.2.1 Potential additional performance measures 35 5.3 Reporting on Performance Indicators 35 6. Other Mayoral strategies and useful references 37 6.1 Other Mayoral strategies 37 6.2 The London Plan 37 6.2.1 Strategic priorities for London’s sub-regions 40 6.2.2 Sub-Regional Development Frameworks (SRDFs) 40 6.2.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance 41 6.2.4 Other London planning issues 41 6.2.5 Unitary Development Plans (UDPs) 41 6.3 Further general information 41 LIP Guidance 2004 3

6.3.1 Sustainable development 41 6.3.2 Equalities 41 6.3.3 Health 42 6.3.4 100 Public Spaces 42 7. Proposed LIP format 43 7.1 Introduction 43 7.2 LIP structure and content 43 7.2.1 Local socio-economic/ demographic context 44 7.2.2 Local transport context 44 7.2.3 Borough policy statement 44 7.2.4 Equality Impact Assessment 44 7.2.5 LIPs proposals relating to MTS priority areas, targets and Appendix C 44 7.2.6 Road safety plan 46 7.2.7 Parking and enforcement plan 46 7.2.8 School travel plan strategy 46 7.2.9 Performance measures 46 7.2.10 Consultation results 46 7.2.11 Borough core capacity statement 46 7.2.12 Funding Implications 46 7. 3Further format advice 48

List of Tables Table 3-1: Major indicative LIP milestones 9 Table 3-2 History of BSP funding 12 Table 3-3 BSP approved funding figures by London sub-region 12 Table 3-4: BSP expected impacts 14 Table 4-1: Priority areas and targets 21 Table 5-1 Performance Indicators 29 Table 6-1: Other Mayoral strategies 37 Table 6-2 Indicative sub-regional growth, 2001 - 2016 39 Table 7-1: Standard LIP list of contents 43 Table 7-2: Summary of LIP funding 47 Table 7-3 LIP copies submission to the Mayor & TfL 48

Appendices Appendix A Legal Framework for LIPs Appendix B Summaries of Relevant Equality and Inclusion Legislation Appendix C Matrix of Transport Strategy Policies and Proposals Appendix D Map of ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes Appendix E Parking and Enforcement Guidance for Local Authorities Appendix F Forms for completion of LIP proposals (Forms 1 & 2) Appendix G Acronyms and glossary 4 Transport for London

This page has intentionally been left blank LIP Guidance 20045

1. Introduction The Mayor of London is responsible for Act 1999 ('the GLA Act’), London local the Transport Strategy for London, as authorities must prepare Local well as for strategies covering spatial Implementation Plans (LIPs) containing development (the London Plan), their proposals for the implementation economic development, air quality, of the Transport Strategy in their area biodiversity, noise, waste and culture. ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ after The Mayor has also developed the publication of the Transport strategies on a range of other issues1. Strategy. The Mayor’s Transport Strategy sets the policy framework for transport in Policy 5.4 of the Transport London and provides the context for Strategy states: the various implementation agencies, ‘Partnership will be sought with the which include Transport for London London boroughs in developing and (TfL), the London boroughs2and the implementing transport policies and Strategic Rail Authority (SRA). plans. The London boroughs are required to set out their proposals for London boroughs play a key role in the the implementation of the Transport planning and delivery of transport in Strategy in their areas. Local the capital. As local authorities, Implementation Plans (LIPs) will reflect boroughs have wide transport-related the Transport Strategy’s objectives, responsibilities that range from planning policies, proposals and priorities. The decisions, through controlling 95 Mayor will issue guidance to the London percent of the capital’s streets, to boroughs setting out detailed management of town centres. Almost requirements for their LIPs. Guidance all journeys in London are affected by a will ensure the LIPs implement the borough transport role. Transport Strategy, are co-ordinated with each other and with the plans of The infrastructure and services for other implementation agencies, and are which boroughs are responsible have effectively implemented and a critical effect on travel in London, monitored. If necessary, the Mayor will accessibility for all users, regeneration, issue directions to ensure the Transport quality of life and the environment in Strategy is implemented.’ London. Borough policies, plans, programmes, projects and activities are Section 41(9) of the GLA Act gives the therefore crucial to effective delivery Mayor powers to set targets in relation of much of the Mayor’s Transport to the delivery of the MTS. This Strategy (MTS). guidance sets out these London targets in Chapter 4, for both boroughs and The Mayor published his first Transport TfL, and explains how the boroughs are Strategy in July 2001. Under Section to consider and implement them in 145 of the Greater London Authority their LIPs.

1. http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/index.jsp 2. Defined as the London boroughs, Corporation of London, City of Westminster and the royal boroughs 6 Transport for London

LIP Guidance is provided to assist and consulting on LIPs in London boroughs in the preparation of their is likely to coincide in part with LIPs and to fulfil the above neighbouring English local authorities requirements. A draft version of this preparing their second round of Local guidance was issued to the boroughs Transport Plans (LTPs). This gives a and other stakeholders for consultation further opportunity to develop during March and April 2004. This final co-ordinated transport solutions in guidance has been developed taking the region. into account the results of the consultation and incorporates many of Finally, TfL intends to enable boroughs the suggestions made in that period. to access and keep up to date with relevant developments and new The following sections of the guidance information relevant to LIPs. Boroughs describe in more detail the purpose of are recommended to ensure key a LIP, the overall process, the MTS officers have access to the regularly framework for LIPs, the new London updated TfL Borough Extranet3and, targets and progress monitoring, where appropriate, use the library of including performance indicators. The technical guidance developed by the final two chapters provide information Department for Transport (DfT) for on other Mayoral strategies, relevant LTPs4. Public access to elements of policy areas and references for LIPs and TfL’s LIP related information, including information on the suggested format this guidance, will remain available5. for LIPs. The LIP process is being designed with electronic transmission and It is expected that the first borough LIPs presentation of information in mind. will be presented for evaluation and To this end, all boroughs are urged to approval by the Mayor in July 2005, as post their LIPs, as they are developed, set out in Table 3-1 (page 9). Preparing on their own websites.

3. https://extranet.tfl.gov.uk/boroughs/default.asp 4. http://www.webtag.org.uk/index.htm 5. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/lips LIP Guidance 2004 7

2. Local Implementation Plans: function and content

2.1 LIP function and scope An assessment of the funding and A Local Implementation Plan (LIP) is a resources needed to deliver the LIP statutory document that must set out Assumptions about sources of a plan of how a borough proposes to funding. implement the MTS in its area. It gives London local authorities the LIPs should also have regard to the opportunity to present their full range London Plan and other Mayoral of transport initiatives and projects strategies, where appropriate. and to show how and when they will address local transport issues through 2.3 Purpose of LIP guidance delivery of the MTS in an integrated The purpose of this guidance is to: manner. Provide boroughs with information to assist the preparation of LIPs. Each borough’s LIP must therefore The guidance seeks to draw demonstrate clearly how the proposals boroughs’ attention to the key areas it contains cover the necessary policy of the MTS to be addressed in LIPs efforts, projects, programmes, Clarify how the Mayor wishes to see implementation mechanisms, planning certain aspects of the MTS taken and co-ordination activities. Relevant forward by boroughs timescales must be clearly set out. Resource assumptions and performance Provide an up-to-date policy context measures must also be included. for LIPs. The guidance contains a summary of the current London LIPs must be based on realistic planning transport policy context (Sections 4 assumptions and should not be used & 6, respectively pages 19 & 37). It as aspirational bidding documents. also contains a matrix (Appendix C), Proposals should be practical, which sets out those policies and sustainable, fundable (so far as can proposals in the MTS relevant to the currently be predicted), represent good boroughs and provides TfL and the value for money and have the support GLA progress updates on these since of relevant partners. publication of the MTS in July 2001 Supply boroughs with information 2.2 Key deliverables for LIPs describing how LIPs will be evaluated Boroughs must ensure that LIPs and how delivery of LIPs will be include: monitored Clear links between LIP proposals and MTS policies and proposals Describe certain new transport targets for TfL and boroughs in A timetable for implementing the relation to the MTS, arising from different proposals in the plan and Mayoral powers under section 41(9) the date by which these will be of the GLA Act completed Give guidance as to whom boroughs Clear proposals for delivery of should consult in preparation of LIPs, Mayoral targets further to that provided in section 145(2) of the GLA Act. 8 Transport for London

This page has intentionally been left blank LIP Guidance 20049

3. LIP process 3.1 Major milestones preparation process is intended to be Table 3-1 sets out the main activities interactive and TfL will be engaging with scheduled during LIP preparation and an boroughs at all stages to ensure indicative overall timetable. The LIP appropriate borough / TfL co-ordination.

Table 3-1: Major indicative LIP milestones Start Finish

Mayor issues LIP guidance July 04 Each borough prepares and submits LIP July 04 September 04 production timetable6 Boroughs prepare draft LIPs6 July 04 December 04 Boroughs issue Consultation Draft LIPs January 05 April 05 Initial LIPs feedback and queries discussed January 05 onwards with relevant boroughs Boroughs redraft LIPs April 05 July 05 Boroughs submit Final LIPs for approval July 05 onwards TfL evaluates LIPs on behalf of Mayor July 05 onwards Final LIPs feedback and queries discussed July 05 onwards with relevant boroughs

Mayoral approval process7 100 days All Approved LIPs in place By December 05

Note 1:In the event that the Mayor proceeds with publication of Transport Strategy Revision: Central London Congestion Charging (see further details on www.tfl.gov.uk/ccextension), the timetable arrangements above will be discussed with those boroughs affected. Supplementary LIP Guidance will be issued if appropriate.

Note 2: It is recommended boroughs follow the naming convention for LIPs introduced above for these key stages – that is, Consultation Draft LIP, Final LIP and Approved LIP.

6. TfL will run borough seminars/workshops during this period to assist with LIP preparation 7. Assuming no substantial revisions or other borough interface issues arise 10 Transport for London

3.2 LIPs funding and resourcing Schemes, projects and programmes In preparing a LIP, boroughs should take of physical works (e.g. installing bus account of the funding and resources lanes, safety schemes, new cycling required to deliver the proposals it facilities) contains. They should describe and Schemes, projects and programmes set these out in the submitted LIP. which focus on promotion, The Mayor will take account of marketing and information boroughs’ presentation of funding and dissemination (e.g. initiatives for resources and will need to be satisfied workplace travel plans, travel that they are reasonable, before information, city car clubs or car approving the LIP. sharing schemes) The MTS sets out a comprehensive Further development of local plans and integrated set of measures over and policies (e.g. transport plans, a ten-year horizon (2001-2011). Unitary Development Plan (UDP) Paragraphs 1.21 and 1.22 in the MTS policies) require that LIPs must be prepared for Co-ordination and collaboration the same time horizon, but that activities (e.g. with other Local detailed plans should be focussed Authorities, in Freight Quality on the first five years. Partnerships, with other local transport related forums). Given the passage of time since publication of the MTS, these detailed To reduce the level of detail and plans in LIPs must be focussed only on paperwork associated with preparing a the first four years. A borough’s LIP LIP, only individual schemes or projects must describe programmes and major with a value of over £100,000 need to projects or schemes planned or be separately itemised in a LIP, unless underway in the 2005/06 financial year the scheme or project is the sole and then set out proposals for the component of a programme or is likely subsequent three years, i.e. from April to be of major significance in transport 2006 to the end of financial year terms (e.g. to another borough or a key 2008/09 covering all types of activity stakeholder) (see Appendix F)8. described in the second paragraph of Boroughs must describe LIPs Section 2.1. For the period from proposals covering policy, planning and 2009-10 to 2010-11, boroughs should co-ordination activities in sufficient indicate whether, they expect the detail to show the outcomes that project or programme in question to support delivery of the MTS and the continue at a similar level, to increase, means by which this is achieved. decrease or have been completed (see For instance, the objectives, scope, section 7.2.5 and Appendix F). frequency and representation at co-ordination meetings, the timetable The policies, planning, projects, for and intended effect of changes to implementation mechanisms and a major borough document, such as co-ordination activities set out in existing transport plan or UDP. A form Section 2.1 will include: for this purpose, the LIP Proposal

8. TfL requires a business case for projects totalling more than £2m for which its funding is required, refer 3.2.3 LIP Guidance 2004 11

Delivery Form (Form 1), is described in Similarly, information relating to section 3.4.1 (see also Section 7.2.5 and necessary personnel and other non- Appendix F). financial resources is to be provided (refer Chapter 7, particularly 7.2.11). Many borough LIP proposals would Non-financial resources may include therefore be described in (annual) capital (e.g. machinery and other programme or summary terms, with the equipment) and/or information major outputs and outcomes described management assets (e.g. survey data in aggregate9. and systems) with a key role in delivery of LIP proposals. Supporting income, expenditure and resources profiles and assumptions are 3.2.1 Central Government funding to be provided for April 2006 to end TfL funding is regularly appraised by 2008/09. Beyond this period, more Central Government as part of the GLA indicative funding and resources and family’s submission during the biennial expected trends are to be included, spending round process. The consistent with a borough’s settlement provided in Government expectations about whether the project Grant enables TfL to invest in its own or programme in question is likely to and borough projects. The results of continue and, if so, at what scale (see TfL’s Spending Review 2004 (SR2004) section 7.2.5 and Appendix F). bid are due later in 2004 (refer to 3.2.2 for impact on LIPs preparation). Each borough is to include the anticipated costs of its proposed Boroughs separately receive significant activities, and the projected sources of revenue funding for transport activities income to meet these costs, together from Central Government through with the major relevant risks or Revenue Support Grant to local uncertainties. This is to include, in authorities. Boroughs are to indicate particular, assessments of boroughs’ clearly in their LIP their assumptions own sources of funding (refer Chapter 7, about its availability for highway particularly Table 7-2) including bus lane maintenance, concessionary fares and enforcement revenues and parking other local transport initiatives. Private account surpluses. The aggregate funds Finance Initiatives (PFIs), particularly available to boroughs from these those for street-lighting, are also to be sources are significant. As such, they included, where appropriate. form an important part of the resources available for implementation of the Boroughs are also encouraged to Mayor’s Transport Strategy. Boroughs include all current and planned Public are reminded of paragraphs 4G 36 and Service Agreements (PSAs)10 relating to 4G 86 of the Mayor’s Transport transport. If so, they should highlight Strategy. These set out the specified which LIP activities are covered by such purposes for which revenues from bus agreements, the associated spending, lane enforcement and parking surpluses identify the expected source of these respectively can be used. funds (e.g. TfL), and any reward applicable.

9. In this regard, boroughs should note potential reasons for delayed LIP approval in 3.4, particularly the one concerning supply of insufficient information 10. As currently organised with the ODPM 12 Transport for London

Where a reward is not 100 percent respect of expenditure incurred…in included as a source of funds for doing anything which in the opinion of transport spending, the borough should TfL is conducive to the provision of include its justification or policy. All safe, integrated, efficient and economic other equivalent conditional transport facilities or services to, from agreements should be similarly or within Greater London.’ This summarised, describing the reward (or financial assistance is currently mainly penalty) element. provided to boroughs through the annual Borough Spending Plan (BSP) 3.2.2 BSP funding process, but includes some other Section 159(1) of the GLA Act 1999 programmes. Previous BSP funding is gives TfL powers to, ‘give financial set out in Table 3-2. assistance to any body or person in

Table 3-2 History of BSP funding

£m Approved Claimed

2002/03 130 121 2003/04 148 144 2004/05 147 (Est.) 147

Note: In addition, there was just over £32m of funding for boroughs as part of Congestion Charging Scheme Complementary Measures from 2001/02 – 2003/04. There are/have been other smaller programmes usually for operational support or small-scale investments.

Table 3-3 shows how this funding has been allocated sub-regionally.

Table 3-3 BSP approved funding figures by London sub-region11

£m 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05

Central 30 31 28 North 14 21 18 West 24 27 29 East 31 36 37 South 24 26 27 Traffic Technology Services 7 7 8 Totals 130 148 147

11. Sub-regions are as described in the London Plan LIP Guidance 2004 13

While BSP funding is not the only 3.2.3 Changes to BSP process source of funding available to boroughs When LIPs are prepared and approved, for transport investment, it is one of the BSP process and any other similar the main ones. Boroughs have programmes will need to be adapted to understandably sought clarity from recognise the existence and TfL on the likely levels of BSP and other requirements of LIPs. The BSP will funding that can be expected over become the main vehicle for TfL and the period covered by their LIPs. The boroughs to appraise LIP progress and realities of the Government's bi-annual to determine the funding TfL is able to spending review process mean that make available to support forthcoming both TfL and the boroughs must plan developments and planned outcomes in conditions of considerable financial within the LIP (refer Sections 5.1, 5.3 uncertainty. Much as TfL would like and 7.2). to give boroughs firm commitments on future funding levels, this is not The requirements of BSP policy possible under the current financial guidance and bidding are expected to regime. reduce. BSP awards, scheme approval and monitoring will support LIP The TfL Business Plan is the basis for progress and objectives. It must not TfL’s approach to Government for be assumed, however, that schemes funding in the SR2004. TfL is also or programmes prioritised for BSP investigating the role of prudential funding by a borough and included in borrowing in its funding, including that an approved LIP will necessarily all be provided to boroughs, and will develop funded via the BSP process. this further once SR2004 information is available. It is expected that some The BSP is currently based on an annual prudential borrowing, from TfL and, cycle that begins around fifteen months possibly, boroughs, will be utilised over before the year in which schemes are the period covered by LIPs. TfL intends implemented. Table 3-4 sets out the to develop this aspect with the expected impact of the advent of LIPs boroughs during the summer and on this cycle by year and major autumn of 2004. Once SR2004 funding function. For the 2006/07 BSP bidding for TfL is clear, TfL will prepare round (taking place in spring 2005), indicative funding levels for the boroughs will need to ensure that bids boroughs to use in their LIPs. can be traced to their evolving LIP. It is currently intended that: Boroughs are recommended to prepare TfL will issue a set of BSP a LIP within a stated range of BSP instructions rather than new funding. The BSP funding assumptions guidance the borough proposes to use must Boroughs will be able to submit or be confirmed with TfL after SR2004 update bids from 2005/6 in the light announcements are made and, in any of that year’s award and their case, before submission of the LIP to TfL for formal consultation. evolving LIP TfL will discuss with boroughs how the future effort on managing the BSP will complement the LIP process. 14 Transport for London

All projects with a total value over £2m approval can be considered. TfL seeking TfL funding are subject to TfL publishes such requirements as part of business case requirements and the BSP guidance and on the TfL boroughs may be requested to supply Borough Extranet12. additional information before funding

Table 3-4: BSP expected impacts

Guidance & Assessment & Scheme Implementing Bidding Announcement Planning & & Monitoring Year Approval Prior to Year StartDuring Year Jan – JulyJuly – NovJan - Feb

2004/05CompletedCompletedIn progressUnaffected 2005/06In progressUnaffectedUnaffected Unaffected and (2004)and to be included in LIP included in LIP 2006/07Reduced ReducedSimpler, if Unaffected, in LIPincluded in LIP 2007/08+ReducedPart of LIPSimpler, ifUnaffected, Progress Reviewin LIPincluded in LIP

The BSP is expected to retain its ability 3.2.4 Role of sub-regional to continue to fund new projects that partnerships arise after LIPs are prepared and/or Partnerships cannot submit a LIP, approved. It will also continue to be however the ability for partnerships to able to fund new initiatives or apply for BSP funding for schemes will programmes, arising from changed continue. This includes those that transport circumstances, assuming operate with a lead borough for a available funds and appropriate changes London-wide programme. In addition, to current programme priorities. Also, following the emphasis on co-operation BSP outcome monitoring and causal across and within London arising from chain methodology will continue to be LIPs (and the London Plan, refer to developed in partnership with the Section 6.2, page 38), it is expected boroughs and it is expected this will that partnerships will participate in the increasingly feature in LIP progress LIPs process in either or both the reviews13. following ways:

12. https://extranet.tfl.gov.uk/boroughs/default.asp 13. Refer to 7.2.4 for information for how this interacts with the LIP Proposal Delivery Forms LIP Guidance 2004 15

Developing schemes, projects Such organisations representative or programmes for delivery in of disabled people as the council participating boroughs (usually considers appropriate responding to a request from those Each other London borough whose boroughs), for inclusion in the area is likely to be affected by boroughs’ LIPs the plan. Organising the preparation/update of sub-regional plans, policies To ensure a well co-ordinated and and, themes that the participating coherent group of LIPs is developed across London, boroughs are also boroughs wish to refer to in recommended to consult: their LIPs. London Fire and Emergency Planning Boroughs can decide which policies, Authority (LFEPA) and London programmes and projects promoted by Ambulance Service representatives sub-regional partnerships they wish to The Highways Agency support. Boroughs must include details Network Rail and the SRA (involving of those policies, programmes and TfL’s London Rail business), where projects in which they are participating appropriate in their LIP. It is therefore suggested that these are included in the relevant Local Mobility Forum, or equivalent, LIP forms using cross-references to and other equality target groups supporting documents that are placed Representatives of business, local in appendices to the LIP. environment, transport and community groups 3.2.5 Other TfL funding for Neighbouring Local Authorities boroughs (for outer London boroughs). TfL manages other programmes or agreements by which boroughs may Boroughs will have their own principles receive funds for transport activities. and procedures for consulting with local These include Enforcement Service stakeholders. The Mayor wishes to be Level Agreements (SLAs), Interchanges satisfied that adequate consultation on and complementary measures for major a LIP has taken place that meets the transport projects (e.g. Congestion requirements of the GLA Act. It is Charging Schemes). TfL will provide the suggested consultation undertaken with affected boroughs with the funding another local authority or government assumptions they are encouraged to agency should focus on the principles, use after the results of SR2004 are key issues and proposals affecting that available. authority/agency. See Section 7.2.10 for consultation information to be included 3.3 Consultation on the LIP in the LIP. Under section 145 of the GLA Act, boroughs are required to consult with: TfL intends to co-ordinate with The relevant Commissioner(s), boroughs to ensure effective (Metropolitan Police Service and approaches are made to pan-London City police) stakeholders and other bodies that might be approached by several or all Transport for London boroughs (e.g. Police Authorities, Highways Agency). 16 Transport for London

3.4 LIP evaluation An unrealistic/unachievable In accordance with section 146 of the programme GLA Act the Mayor can only approve a Unrealistic/unsuitable LIP where he/she considers: milestones/performance The LIP is consistent with the MTS indicators/end date The proposals contained in the LIP Inadequate information on funding are adequate for the purposes of the and resource requirements. implementation of the MTS The timetable for implementing 3.4.1 LIP evaluation framework those proposals, and the date by The evaluation framework is based on which proposals are to be the principle that LIP evaluation needs implemented, are adequate for to be straightforward for boroughs, those purposes. TfL and the Mayor. It is therefore designed to: TfL will be involved in the evaluation Build on what exists, where possible process, with the Mayor retaining the Utilise formats with which boroughs decision-making powers. If the Mayor are familiar is not satisfied with the content of a Provide a common framework to LIP, he may require the borough to appraise LIP submissions. revise its LIP to meet his requirements within a set deadline. The Mayor will give the borough clear information on The LIP evaluation framework is the issues in the LIP that need to be intended to meet several objectives: addressed. Transparency Consistency In carrying out LIP evaluation, the Mayor Ease of use by both boroughs and TfL will have regard to the contents and TfL of this guidance. Approval of a LIP may be delayed for one or more of the Maximise the chances of achieving following reasons: a full set of approvable LIPs. Failure to set out appropriate plans for delivery of the MTS The framework is envisaged to be iterative with formal submission of LIPs Unjustified inconsistency with the at two stages: when the Consultation London Plan and other statutory Draft is submitted to TfL and on Mayoral strategies submission of the Final LIP to the Failure to address the priorities for Mayor and TfL (the indicative timetable borough actions set out within this is described in Table 3-1). TfL will guidance in Table 4-1 provide feedback on the Consultation Form or structure incompatible Draft, which the borough should then with this guidance respond to in its Final LIP. The borough then submits the Final LIP for a further Insufficient information on evaluation to both the Mayor and TfL. programmes or schemes and their The Mayor will then decide upon background to permit proper approval of the LIP, supported by TfL’s evaluation evaluation. LIP Guidance 200417

If, in the view of the Mayor, there are 3.5 Legal framework and issues shortcomings identified in the Final LIP, Legal requirements for the preparation it is likely that there will be further and approval of LIPs are set out in iterations involving reworking the Final Appendix A. The following paragraphs LIP. Identified shortcomings (on which identify some known pending significant feedback will be given to the borough legislative or regulatory changes and concerned) that are insufficiently how they might affect LIPs. Appendix B addressed in subsequent submissions also summarises the legislative of the Final LIP may lead to the Mayor framework for equalities issues relevant deciding to take further steps, as to LIPs that boroughs are encouraged to described in the GLA Act. be aware of throughout this process.

The evaluation framework will benefit 3.5.1 Strategic Environmental greatly from the submission of robust Assessment (SEA) LIPs. Two forms are included in The Mayor expects London Authorities Appendix F, described further in section to ensure compliance with Directive 7.2.5, that provide the tools for this 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament framework and which underpin LIP and Council on the Assessment of evaluation. These are: the Effects of Certain Plans and Programmes on the Environment (SEA), 1. LIP Proposal Delivery Form (Form 1): and any implementing measures that Captures the essential details and are introduced by Government14. summary of a borough proposal to TfL considers that a co-ordinated deliver the MTS approach is likely to be more effective 2. LIP Proposal Summary Sheet in determining whether a LIP generally (Form 2): Enables proposals entered requires an SEA and is exploring this onto LIP Proposal Delivery Forms to issue with the ALG. be indexed against the MTS in a convenient, summary format. 3.5.2 Traffic Management Bill The Traffic Management Bill is currently The use of the forms, subject to any in passage through Parliament and, agreed variations, is strongly if/when enacted, is likely to impact on recommended to facilitate LIP TfL and boroughs and therefore on LIPs. preparation and evaluation. The forms and framework are designed to identify Priorities II, III, and IV in Table 4-1 relate LIP strengths and weaknesses and to measures from the MTS that are enable focussed feedback to boroughs designed to improve the efficiency of for improvement, leading to approval. operation of London’s busy main roads. Please refer to Chapter 7 for further These priorities and the associated MTS details on the structure and content proposals require boroughs to plan framework for LIPs. developments to improve the safeguarding of traffic operations on

14. http://www.webtag.org.uk/sitepages/consult/pdf/211consult.pdf; the text of the Directive is at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_197/ l_19720010721en00300037.pdf 18 Transport for London

their network as a key feature of their The present parliamentary timetable LIPs. Important gains can be achieved suggests Royal Assent in early in this respect through improvements autumn 2004. to operational management. TfL’s Director of Traffic Management is The envisaged network management leading TfL’s effort in this area and duty would require active and co- co-ordinating and providing support to ordinated management of the road the boroughs, especially in provision of network consistent with wider local, information systems (in particular regional and national policies and through the London Traffic Control guidance as well as the overall policies Centre and with LondonWorks). of a borough.

The Traffic Management Bill 2003 The published draft guidance on the proposes a network management Network Management Duty provided duty on traffic authorities, which would for in the Bill acknowledges the MTS require the appointment of traffic and envisages a need for boroughs both managers in each authority and the to take account of it when making designation in London of ‘strategic’ arrangements to meet the duty and also roads. Currently, the Bill enables the to set out those arrangements in their issue of statutory guidance (prepared LIPs. As far as is practicable, boroughs by the Secretary of State) on how the are encouraged to take into account the road network should be managed. published draft guidance. LIP's Part 1 5/8/04 10:28 am Page 19

LIP Guidance 200419

4. Mayor’s Transport Strategy and key priorities

4.1 The Mayor’s Transport their LIPs and demonstrating how they Strategy will contribute towards meeting the The MTS is the principal reference for Mayor’s targets, boroughs will need to LIPs. The MTS sets out the ten key take account of the local context. transport priorities15that aim to provide a balanced transport network to 4.3 The LIP guidance ‘matrix’ meet the diverse needs of London, its The matrix in Appendix C lists the MTS economy and people. policies and proposals that have particular relevance to boroughs. 4.2 The Mayor’s priority areas Within this list, those proposals that for borough implementation the Mayor considers reflect his key priority areas for action (listed in Table and related targets 4-1) are highlighted in pink. The ten key transport priorities are set out on page 97 (Chapter 4A) of the The following information is included in MTS. Within these priorities, the eight the matrix, which is available online in a areas for implementation that the more flexible format16: Mayor regards as having the highest Policy reference number from the priority for LIPs are set out in the first MTS, e.g. 4F.Pr5 column of Table 4-1. These priority areas for implementation must be Priority area for implementation (a reflected in LIPs and, as in the MTS, numbered reference to Table 4-1) are not listed in priority order. Policy or proposal description from the MTS Table 4-1 also shows the targets the Current progress and future plans - Mayor has set for implementation of summarising developments by the MTS by TfL and the boroughs TfL/the GLA that have occurred (under Section 41(9) of the GLA Act). since publication of the MTS in July These are formally published in the 2001 document ‘Transport Strategy Implementation Targets’ of July 2004. Responses from boroughs, categorised as either required The first column of Table 4-1 identifies (‘must’), or desirable (‘encouraged’). the priority areas for implementation that the Mayor will focus on in Approval of a LIP will include a assessing LIPs, whilst the targets determination as to whether it provide a clear guide for TfL and addresses the ‘musts’ in the matrix and boroughs on the progress the Mayor a LIP will not fail on the basis of items expects to be achieved. In developing that are ‘encouraged.’

15. Not all 10 priorities are relevant to boroughs, as they include priorities for the Underground and rail network 16. https://extranet.tfl.gov.uk/boroughs/default.asp – as an Excel table 20 Transport for London

Boroughs are encouraged to use the A balanced approach to road-space online version of the matrix as a allocation (refer 4.5.1) working document. They may, for Requirements for sustainable example, update it with their progress development (refer 6.3.1) in delivering the MTS since July 2001 and the relevance of each MTS proposal Promoting equality and inclusion to their borough. A matrix amended in (refer 6.3.2). this way is not required to be part of a submitted LIP. However, it is 4.5.1 Balancing needs for considered potentially useful for a road-space allocation borough to have some form of The MTS recognises that the needs of reference like this, e.g. to provide all road users, including pedestrians and the background and context for frontagers, have to be continually the proposals in their LIP and for balanced as part of the management of providing support for the completed London’s streets. Policy 4G.2 refers to Form 2 (LIPs Summary Sheets refer the need to take account of the road to Section 7.2.5). hierarchy in balancing the use of street space. On the TLRN and most other 4.4 The map of ‘A’ Roads and ‘A’ Roads there should be ‘a general Busy Bus Routes presumption in favour of distribution, The map in Appendix D charts the particularly for those making business ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes’ that journeys, bus passengers and boroughs must review, in conjunction commercial vehicle operators.’ Whilst with TfL, and prepare proposals in on other roads ‘there is a presumption response to MTS proposals 4F.Pr8 and in favour of access and amenity, 4G.Pr18 as described in the matrix in particularly for residents, buses, Appendix C. pedestrians and cyclists, and where necessary, business access.’ Policy 4.5 Cross-cutting goals 3C.17 in the London Plan supports In identifying planned actions to meet this approach. the priorities in Table 4-1, boroughs must take account of opportunities It is recognised that town centres pose to support the following, which are particular challenges, where the need derived from the Mayor’s overarching to accommodate distribution, access objectives set out on page 95 of and amenity creates competing the MTS: requirements. The aim should be to strike a balance between these Promoting safety, and perceptions competing priorities that supports of safety, for all travel modes both the vitality of town centres and Encouraging greater use of requirements for distribution. sustainable means for travel LIP Guidance 2004 | 21 Table 4-1: Priority areas and targets Targets have been set to indicate the pace of delivery of the MTS that the Mayor expects. Achievement of these targets will require input from both TfL and boroughs. These targets are not solely for boroughs to achieve and, indeed, could not be achieved by boroughs alone. The targets are set, with further details about the background and their current position, in Transport Strategy Implementation Targets, available from the GLA and TfL17. Priority area for Related target for TfL MTS transport system Transport Strategy implementation and boroughs priorities (Refer MTS p97) references I. Improving road safety 1.Road Safety: TfL and boroughs (j) Bringing forward new integration 4G.Pr7 (obtaining the support of the Police initiatives to: ‘…enhance safety 4G.Pr9 where appropriate) are to achieve a and security across all means reduction of 40% in numbers Killed and of travel…’ Seriously Injured by 2010 compared with 1994-1998 overall and separately for pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists; a reduction of 50% in the number of children killed or seriously injured and a reduction of 10% in the slight casualty rate per 100 million vehicle kilometres. (Existing target set in table following Paragraph 4G.44 of the Transport Strategy; also referenced in the London Road Safety Plan). Target applies at both London-wide and at individual borough levels. 2. School Road Safety: Boroughs are to review road safety* around all primary and secondary schools in London by 2008.

Target applies at both London-wide and at individual borough levels. * Where the reviews show these to be necessary, 20mph zones or other safety measures must be implemented by 2011 to achieve target reductions in London’s Road Safety Plan.

17. https://extranet.tfl.gov.uk/boroughs/default.asp (public - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/about/lip/index.shtml) LIP Guidance 2004 | 22 Priority area for Related target for MTS transport system Transport Strategy implementation TfL and boroughs priorities (Refer MTS p97) references II. Improving bus journey times 3. Bus Excess Wait Time: TfL to (c) Making radical improvements to 4F.Pr2 and reliability reduce bus EWT to 1.3 minutes per bus services across London, including 4F.Pr3 passenger journey by 2009/10. increasing the bus system’s capacity, 4F.Pr6-8 improving reliability and increasing the 4G.Pr4 Target applies at London-wide level. frequency of services 4. Borough Bus Target: An additional target will be set for boroughs’ contribution to improving bus journey times through the management of their road space. The Performance Indicator will be discussed with boroughs over the next 12 months and the Target set in summer 2005. III. Relieving traffic congestion and 5. Traffic volumes: TfL and boroughs (a) Reducing traffic congestion 4G.Pr12 improving journey time reliability are to achieve, between 2001 and 4G.Pr14 including through the use of travel 2011, an absolute reduction in weekday 4G.Pr18-20 demand measures. traffic of 15% in central London, zero 4G.Pr24 growth across the rest of inner 4H.Pr3 Plans should have regard to the London, and a reduction in growth in 4K.Pr3 particular traffic conditions in outer London by a third, from 7.5% to 4P.Pr4 different parts of London 5%, with the aim of achieving zero growth in outer London town centres. (Existing target set in Proposal 4G.12 of the Transport Strategy.) Target applies at London-wide level. Boroughs must publish a target in their LIP setting out their contribution to the London-wide target, taking account of local factors and the sub-regional analysis in table 4.1a. See also table 4.1b for definition of outer London town centres. LIP Guidance 2004 | 23 Priority area for Related target for MTS transport system Transport Strategy implementation TfL and boroughs priorities (Refer MTS p97) references 6. General Traffic Journey Time Reliability: TfL and boroughs are to ensure disruption and variability of journey times for general traffic on ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes is reduced, or not increased, year on year (new target). Until a new DfT ITIS survey is in place, progress against this target will be measured for the TLRN, a.m. peak only. The process of monitoring borough roads will be discussed with boroughs once survey data is available. Target applies at London-wide level and at individual borough level. 7. Modal Shift: TfL and boroughs are to maintain or increase the proportion of personal travel made by means other than car (new target). Target applies at London-wide level. 8. School Travel Plans: boroughs are to work with schools and groups of schools to review travel to all schools by March 2008, with significant progress having been made by March 2006 (new target, with regard to national DfT/DfES ‘Travelling to School: an action plan’ target)*. Target applies at both London-wide and at individual borough levels. *Travel plans should be developed and implemented where required to support the achievement of the LIPs London-wide modal shift target, defined above. LIP Guidance 2004 | 24 Priority area for Related target for MTS transport system Transport Strategy implementation TfL and boroughs priorities (Refer MTS p97) references IV. Improving the working of parking 9. Compliance: boroughs are to h) Making the distribution of goods 4F.Pr21 and loading arrangements to achieve improvements in compliance and services in London more reliable, 4G.Pr1 provide fair, reasonable and effective with parking and loading regulations sustainable and efficient, whilst 4G.Pr15 enforcement of regulations, from a baseline to be agreed between minimising negative environmental 4G.Pr16 recognising the needs of business for boroughs and TfL by December 2004. impacts. 4G.Pr17 servicing and delivery as well as other 4H.Pr2 (g) Supporting local transport road users, thus contributing to easing Target applies at London-wide level. initiatives, including improved access congestion and improving access to 7. Modal Shift: (new target as in III to town centres and regeneration town centres and regeneration areas above). areas…

V. Improving accessibility and social 10. Access: TfL and boroughs are to (i) Improving the accessibility of 3.Pr1 inclusion on the transport network. achieve year on year improvements London’s transport system so that 4D.Pr3 Plans should have regard to safety and in the proportion of trips made by everyone, regardless of disability, can 4D.Pr6 security for women and vulnerable equality and inclusion target groups enjoy the benefits of living in, working 4E.Pr9 users under-represented in the public in and visiting the Capital, thus 4E.Pr13 transport travel market, particularly improving social inclusion 4F.Pr11 disabled people, older people and 4N.Pr5 women travelling at night (new target). 4O.Pr1-14 4P.Pr5 Target applies at London-wide level. 11. Taxicard: boroughs to ensure that their Taxicard scheme conforms to an agreed all-London standard in terms of service quality, eligibility assessment and entitlement by 2006 (new target). Target applies to individual boroughs. LIP Guidance 2004 | 25 Priority area for Related target for MTS transport system Transport Strategy implementation TfL and boroughs priorities (Refer MTS p97) references VI. Encourage walking by improving 12. Walking: TfL and boroughs are to (g) Supporting local transport 3.Pr2 the street environment, conditions for achieve an increase of at least 10% in initiatives, including…walking and 3.Pr4-6 pedestrians and through the use of journeys made on foot per person in cycling schemes, Safer Routes To 4G.Pr10 travel demand measures London between 2001 and 2015 School, road safety improvements… 4G.Pr11 (new target). 4I.Pr1-8 4I.Pr10 Target applies at London-wide level. 4K.Pr4 7. Modal Shift: (new target – as in III above).

VII. Encourage cycling by improving 13. Cycling: TfL and boroughs are to (g) Supporting local transport 4J.Pr1 conditions for cyclists and through achieve an increase of at least 80% in initiatives, including…walking and 4J.Pr3 the use of travel demand measures cycling in London between 2001 and cycling schemes, Safer Routes To 4J.Pr4-9 2011 (new target). School, road safety improvements… Target applies at London-wide level.

VIII. Bringing transport infrastructure 14. Roads: TfL and boroughs are to (f) Improving journey time reliability 4G.Pr25 to a state of good repair bring all ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus for car users, which will particularly 4G.Pr26 Routes up to serviceable standard – benefit outer London where car use that is, a UK PMS score of 70 or dominates, whilst reducing car below – by 2010 (existing target). dependency by increasing travel choice Target applies at both London-wide and at individual borough levels. (g) Supporting local transport initiatives, including…better maintenance of roads and bridges 26 Transport for London

Table 4.1a: Sub-regional target percentage changes in traffic growth, 2001 – 2011

Central Inner Outer Town London London London Centres (Table 4.1b)

Boroughs in Central sub region -1 5 -2 - - Boroughs in East sub region - 4 6 1 Boroughs in West sub region - -2 4 -1 Boroughs in North sub region - 0 6 1 Boroughs in South sub region - - 4 -1 London Average -1 5 0 5 0

Note: - Figures are from TfL’s LTS Model assuming TfL full Business Plan - Data is weekday (07.00-19.00). Transport investment set out by TfL full business plan.

The provision of significant additional public transport capacity in the east sub-region means that an outer London target of 6% is realistic despite it having a greater projected percentage growth in population and employment than the north and other sub-regions.

Table 4.1b

Outer London town centres for target 5 are the ‘metropolitan’ centres in London Plan table A1.1 (listed below), and may also include such ‘major’ centres listed in that table as the relevant boroughs consider appropriate

Bromley Croydon Ealing Harrow Hounslow Ilford Kingston Romford Sutton Wood Green LIP Guidance 2004 27

5. LIP monitoring and performance indicators 5.1 Borough progress reports The review will also aim to differentiate on LIPs between factors within and outside a Once a LIP is approved, a LIP borough’s control. For the first few performance and progress report will be years, boroughs should expect the expected from each borough at the end review to include a senior level meeting of July18 each year. This report will between representatives of TfL and the support a high level review of borough borough. Such a meeting may be LIP progress and performance, an waived by agreement, thereafter, for outcome from which is anticipated to boroughs making significant progress be the context and justification for towards delivery of their LIP. further BSP funding. In circumstances where a borough’s The main elements of the Borough LIP measured progress is unsatisfactory due Progress Report will be a review of to factors within its control, the Mayor performance against targets, updates to intends to provide advice on any LIPs Proposal Delivery Forms and LIPs shortcomings to the relevant borough, Proposal Summary Sheets (Forms 1 & 2, and has the power to do this in the Section 3.4.1, Section 7.2.5 and form of a direction under Section 153 Appendix F) and information on: of the GLA Act. A borough will usually be given a period to address identified Major milestones achieved since LIP submitted shortcomings and the opportunity of a follow-up review to assess the need for Changes to milestone dates in further action, which might include the the LIP invocation of other Mayoral powers. Where relevant, reasons for delays It is recognised that circumstances will Progress on Performance Indicators change over the lifetime of a LIP, for (described in Section 5.2) example in relation to the availability Significant changes to information of funding or delays to major projects. reported in the LIP, including The annual LIP performance and updates on funding, resources and progress report will provide an cross-cutting goals opportunity for a borough to set out

Assessment of BSP performance changes in circumstances likely to and need for future funding. affect the timing of delivery of the proposals set out in their LIP, and such circumstances would taken fully into To be meaningful, the review will need account in appraising the annual report. to take account of TfL updates and progress (e.g. on the TLRN) so that any resulting decisions are coherent.

18. TfL data being made available at the end of May 28 Transport for London

5.2 Performance indicators with requirements and suggestions for Section 4.2 indicates the Mayor’s delivery milestones in Appendix C. priority areas for implementation through LIPs and accompanying Boroughs will note that there are a statutory targets for these areas. number of instances where they are Further details on data sources to being asked to propose or confirm monitor progress in achieving targets milestones for the Mayor to consider. and performance indicators are Any proposal for milestones should available online19. include, as far as practicable, details of how they will contribute to meeting the Performance indicators will be the basis relevant target. for detailed monitoring needed to fulfil the statutory requirement for LIPs to Where relevant, LIPs should describe demonstrate how the MTS will be the outturn performance for 2003/04 implemented locally, with a timetable as a base, and identify major delivery and end date. Key performance milestone targets for at least the end indicators are described in Table 5-1, of 2006/07 and the end of 2008/09.

19. https://extranet.tfl.gov.uk/boroughs/default.asp (public - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/about/lip/index.shtml) LIP Guidance 2004 | 29 Table 5-1 Performance Indicators The table shows the performance indicators and how they relate to the targets (from Table 4-1). All performance indicators listed in this table should be included in a borough LIP and annual LIP progress reports.

Priority Target / PI Relevance Performance Definition of Data source (Target No. L-W B Indicator (PI) Performance Indicator from Table 4-1) level level description I. Improving Target 1 Killed and Seriously The following will be reported: London Road Safety road safety Injured Number of adults killed and seriously Unit, TfL injured overall and separately for pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists Number of children killed or seriously injured The slight casualty rate (adults and children). NB. The target is for 10% reduction in the slight casualty rate per 100 million vehicle kilometres. Until guidance is received from DfT on how this should be measured, slight casualties will be monitored as casualty numbers rather than a casualty rate. Data should be additionally disaggregated by: Ethnic group for pedestrians injuries Vehicle classification for all incidents. All data measured in calendar years.

Target 2 School Road Safety Number and percentage of primary and Boroughs secondary schools: - Reviewed

PI - With schemes implemented Boroughs LIP Guidance 2004 | 30

Priority Target / PI Relevance Performance Definition of Data source (Target No. L-W B Indicator (PI) Performance Indicator from Table 4-1) level level description II. Improving Target 3 Bus Excess Wait Bus EWT (High Frequency Routes), minutes Monitoring & bus journey Time per customer Reporting Manager, times and Performance, reliability London Buses, TfL Target 4 Borough Bus Target Under development PI Bus Lanes Total bus lane kilometre/hours in operation Bus Priority, Surface per borough Transport, TfL

PI Bus priority junctions Number of bus priority junctions in operation Bus Priority, Surface per borough Transport, TfL PI Bus stop clearways Number and percentage of bus stops with Bus Priority, Surface clearways per borough Transport, TfL PI Accessible bus stops Number and percentage of accessible bus Bus Priority, Surface stops per borough Transport, TfL III. Relieving traffic Target 5 Traffic volumes in DfT National Road Traffic Survey provides Group Transport congestion and central, inner, outer annual data at borough level (does not Planning & Policy, improving journey London and town provide data for town centres) Finance & Planning, TfL time reliability centres. including through Target 6 General traffic The performance indicator provides journey Surface Transport, TfL the use of travel journey time time variation for a.m. peak, TLRN only. demand measures. reliability Journey time reliability is based on a series of surveys undertaken during October/November. Plans should have The result is a percentage figure which regard to the indicates for the a.m. weekday peak period, particular traffic the worst journey time on the TLRN in any conditions in two week period compared to the usual different parts (average) journey time during that two of London week period. LIP Guidance 2004 | 31

Priority Target / PI Relevance Performance Definition of Data source (Target No. L-W B Indicator (PI) Performance Indicator from Table 4-1) level level description Subject to the nature and availability of Surface Transport, ITIS data, TfL will develop a performance TfL indicator to cover more of the day and of the road network. This will enable a more thorough monitoring of progress towards achievement of the target. Boroughs will be informed of progress in developing the performance indicator

Target 7 Modal share The proportion of personal travel made on Group Transport each mode, specifically highlighting the Planning & Policy, proportion made by means other than the car. Finance & Planning, TfL Measured by London Transport Demand Survey (LTDS)

Target 8 School Travel PlansNumber and percentage of schools: Boroughs - where review of travel has been completed PI - where travel plan deemed necessary and developed PI - where travel plan implemented

PI School travel – School trips by modes other than car, Group Transport modal share, proportion of mechanised and non- Planning & Policy, non-car modes mechanised trips as defined in LTDS Finance & Planning, TfL

PI Work travel – Work trips by modes other than car, Group Transport modal share, proportion of mechanised and non- Planning & Policy, non-car modes mechanised trips as defined in LTDS Finance & Planning, TfL LIP Guidance 2004 | 32 Priority Target / PI Relevance Performance Definition of Data source (Target No. L-W B Indicator (PI) Performance Indicator from Table 4-1) level level description IV. Improving the Target 9 Compliance Factor Compliance factors will be reported for a Traffic Enforcement, working of parking number of non-moving contraventions and Surface Transport, and loading will be analysed for different times of the Transport Policing & arrangements to day and different days of the week. Enforcement, TfL provide fair, Compliance factors for moving offences will reasonable and be reported for a single day’s data at each effective static camera location on a monthly basis. enforcement of regulations, Survey will comprise: recognising the 18 hours of detailed static survey on needs of business 16 sites (eight TLRN and eight borough) for servicing and every three months delivery as well as 12 hours of borough static surveys on other road users, 33 boroughs, three sites per borough, thus contributing every six months. to easing Surveys will be conducted quarterly; the congestion and first report is due summer 2004 improving access to town centres and regeneration PI Business Business satisfaction with fairness of TfL and business areas satisfaction enforcement of parking and loading organisations regulations. New survey to be developed, or to be linked to existing survey if suitable

PI Public provision of Change in parking supply for major town Boroughs long stay parking centres (see Table 4.1b) at borough level, supply both on and by year as an actual number and proportion off street of total. LIP Guidance 2004 | 33 Priority Target / PI Relevance Performance Definition of Data source (Target No. L-W B Indicator (PI) Performance Indicator from Table 4-1) level level description V. Improving Target 10 The number and rate Number and rate of trips made on each mode Group Transport accessibility and of trips made by E&I of transport as defined in and measured by Planning & Policy, social inclusion target groups LTDS for: Finance & Planning, on the transport Disabled people (all disabilities aggregated, TfL network. Plans all day) should have Older people (all aged over 65, all day) regard to safety Women travelling between 19.00-07.00 hrs and security for women & PI The percentage of As per BV measure; this indicator only Boroughs vulnerable users pedestrian crossings includes zebra, pelican, puffin and toucan with facilities for crossings, and traffic lights with a pedestrian disabled people phase. All crossings at a set of traffic lights (BV165) or at a roundabout should be counted as one crossing. All crossings at one large round- about with a series of mini-roundabouts should likewise be counted as one crossing

Target 11 Taxicard Milestone: achievement of compliance Boroughs with London-wide standard VI. Encourage Target 12 Volume and rate Number and rate per person of walking Group Transport walking by of walking trips trips per annum, as measured by LTDS. Planning & Policy, improving Walking trips are those where the person Finance & Planning, the street walks all the way. This excludes walks that TfL environment, are one leg of a journey involving other conditions for modes of transport pedestrians and through the use PI Condition of footway Proportion of footway in categories 1, Engineering North of travel demand 1a and 2 as per BV performance indicator Central, Surface measures 187a. TfL Road Network Operations annual Transport, TfL statistics, based on the UK PMS system LIP Guidance 2004 | 34 Priority Target / PI Relevance Performance Definition of Data source (Target No. L-W B Indicator (PI) Performance Indicator from Table 4-1) level level description VII.Encourage Target 13 Volume and rate of Number and rate per person of cycling trips Group Transport cycling by cycling trips per annum, as measured by LTDS. Cycling Planning & Policy, improving trips are those where the person cycles all Finance & Planning, conditions for the way. This excludes cycling as one leg of TfL cyclists and a journey involving other modes of transport through the use of travel demand measures

VIII. Bringing Target 14 Condition of ‘A’ Roads Road condition, share of TLRN and BPRN Boroughs and TfL transport and Busy Bus Routes carriageway lower than score of 70 from infrastructure UKPMS to a state of good repair LIP Guidance 2004 35

5.2.1 Potential additional performance Levels of crime or perception of measures personal security on the street Boroughs may consider and suggest Measures of accessibility to public additional performance indicators that transport. would assist in demonstrating the adequacy of their LIPs to implement In preparing their LIPs, boroughs are the MTS locally. Possible additional encouraged also to consider how their performance indicators could include: transport proposals support the key performance measures in the London Environmental measures such as: Plan, for example directing economic Air quality, or proxies such as total and population growth into key areas, emissions of fine particles (PM10) increasing the supply of new homes, and nitrogen oxides increasing opportunities for those Number of fleet vehicles running on suffering from disadvantage in the alternative fuels labour market. Ecological footprint, as measured by 5.3 Reporting on Performance CO emissions 2 Indicators Noise pollution using World Health TfL intends to provide annual data at Organisation (WHO) guidelines. the end of May each year on those targets in Table 4-1 and on performance Programme delivery measures such as: indicators identified in Table 5-1. This Numbers of travel plans. will support LIP progress reporting outlined in Section 5.1. Outcomes contributing to targets in Table 4-1 such as: Travel to school as measured by trips to and from school by main mode (age 5-16) 36 Transport for London

This page has intentionally been left blank LIP's Part 5 21/7/04 1:58 pm Page 37

LIP Guidance 200437

6. Other Mayoral strategies and useful references 6.1 Other Mayoral strategies Other strategies and their publication The GLA Act requires the Mayor to status at the time of writing are produce various strategies for London. summarised in Table 6-1. The latest The MTS has been discussed in Chapter 4. published TfL Business Plan is another useful reference document. Table 6-1: Other Mayoral strategies

Strategy Publication Status

Statutory Economic DevelopmentPublished July 2001* Spatial Development Published February 2004 (the ‘London Plan’) Biodiversity Action PlanPublished July 2002 Municipal Waste ManagementPublished September 2003 Air QualityPublished September 2002 Ambient NoisePublished March 2004 CulturePublished April 2004 Non-statutory: EnergyPublished February 2004 Childcare Published November 2003 Children and Young People Published January 2004 Alcohol and Drugs in London - Published January 2002 policy and action plan Rough-sleepers Published March 2001 Domestic Violence Published November 2001

This LIP Guidance has been prepared Congestion Charging. If a decision were and consulted on prior to any decision to be taken to publish this Revision, by the Mayor to publish, with or supplementary LIP Guidance would be without amendment, The Transport issued if appropriate. Strategy Revision: Central London

* A revised Economic Development Strategy (EDS) is currently being consulted on, and is due for publication in Autumn 2004. 38 Transport for London

6.2 The London Plan Boroughs are encouraged to have regard The Mayor’s Spatial Development to the London Plan when preparing their Strategy, the London Plan, replaces the LIP. A document cross-referencing the previous strategic planning guidance for policies and proposals in the MTS with London (RPG3). The London Plan20 the London Plan is available on the TfL ‘is the strategic plan setting out an website21. integrated social, economic and environmental framework for the future Boroughs are encouraged to develop development of London, looking their LIPs in a manner that enables forward 15 – 20 years.’ It ‘integrates planning policy, including the the physical and geographic dimensions London Plan, to be integrated with of the Mayor’s other strategies, transport policies and activities in including broad locations for change LIPs (refer 6.2.5). and providing a framework for land use management and development, which The London Plan sets out growth is strongly linked to improvements in forecasts for population and infrastructure, especially transport.’ It employment that the spatial policies also ‘provides the London-wide context seek to accommodate. An indicative within which individual boroughs must sub-regional breakdown of population, set their local planning policies.’ housing and employment growth is reproduced in Table 6-2 and indicates The London Plan supports the Mayor’s the expected level of growth that needs vision for London, (as do all the to be supported. Sub-Regional strategies) which is to develop London Development Frameworks (SRDFs) are as an exemplary, sustainable world city, now being developed with boroughs based on three interwoven themes: and other stakeholders. These will Strong diverse long term economic provide an analysis of how the growth growth forecasts will impact across London, together with an assessment of the Social inclusivity to give all linkages necessary between land use, Londoners the opportunity to share transportation and intensification to in London’s success meet that growth (see Section 6.2.2). Fundamental improvements in London’s environment and use of resources.

20. The following three quoted extracts are from the preamble, page vii 21. https://extranet.tfl.gov.uk/boroughs/default.asp (public - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/about/lip/index.shtml) LIP Guidance 2004 39

Table 6-2 Indicative sub-regional growth, 2001 - 201622

Sub- region Population(1) Minimum Employment(3) annual 2001 2016 Annual housing 2001 2016 Annual (‘000) (‘000) growth target(2) (‘000) (‘000) growth (‘000) (‘000) Central 1,525 1,738 14.2 7.1 1,644 1,883 15.9 East 1,991 2,262 18.1 6.9 1,087 1,336 16.6 West 1,421 1,560 9.3 3.0 780 866 5.7 North 1,042 1,199 9.0 3.1 386 412 1.7 South 1,329 1,380 3.4 2.8 587 623 2.4 London 7,308 8,117 53.9 23.0 4,484 5120 42.4

Note: Columns and rows may not total exactly because of rounding. Source: (1) GLA Population and Household Forecasts: 2001 – 16, SDS Technical Report 5. GLA, 2003 (2) London’s Housing Capacity, GLA, 2000. The table shows the housing capacity estimates over the last three phases of the study. The annual average figures differ from those in table 3A.1, which are based on four phases. (3) The Future of Employment in Greater London. SDS Technical Report 8. GLA, Volterra Economic Consulting, 2002. Demand and Supply of Business Space in London, SDS Technical Report 21. GLA, Roger Tym & Partners, 2002

Further information on the context High levels of growth in the Thames of the growth forecasts is given in Gateway will depend upon the London Plan, particularly substantial new and improved Chapters 1, 5 and 6. infrastructure to stimulate and facilitate investment Chapter 3C of the London Plan deals Central London’s accessibility and specifically with travel in London. environment should be enhanced by Paragraph 3.166 of the London Plan locating high-density developments stresses the need to ensure that at points of good public transport transport policies and proposals should match the spatial development policies accessibility where sufficient in the plan, for example: capacity exists

22. Table 5A.1 of the London Plan, page 224 40 Transport for London

Access to town centres by means of 6.2.1 Strategic priorities for London’s public transport should be improved sub-regions with better public transport services Boroughs are encouraged also to have regard to the spatial priorities of the The majority of journeys in the suburbs will continue to be by car, sub-region to which they belong, identifying in their LIP how the borough but bus services, and their will contribute to achieving the delivery integration with rail and Underground of this part of the London Plan. The should be enhanced sub-regional polices are set out in Opportunity Areas and Areas for Chapter 5 of the London Plan and Intensification particularly in east emphasise the need to: London should be supported by Identify capacity to accommodate improved public transport new job and housing opportunities, There should be improved as well as appropriate mixed-use integration of freight transport development between different modes, between Promote and intensify retailing, major freight interchanges and the services, employment, leisure and main centres they serve. housing in town centres and opportunities for mixed-use The London Plan encourages patterns development and forms of development that reduce Plan for and secure the necessary the need to travel, especially by car. It financial resources to deliver planned promotes increases of up to 50 percent in the capacity of public transport in transport infrastructure, including London over the plan period. It also local schemes that improve public supports high trip generating transport, walking and cycling development only at locations with connections to town centres and both high levels of public transport employment locations. accessibility and capacity sufficient to meet the transport requirement of the 6.2.2 Sub-Regional Development development (policies 3C.1 and 3C.9). Frameworks (SRDFs) Within the London Plan there are A priority for the Mayor and the London proposals for five SRDFs (Central, East, Plan is tackling social inclusion. West, North and South). The Mayor will Boroughs are encouraged to take develop these in more detail working account of Areas for Regeneration and with the partnerships, boroughs and the distribution of equality target local stakeholders. groups in developing and assessing their policies and priorities. In addition, for The draft framework for east London is the areas of the London Plan identified expected to be published by autumn as Opportunity Areas, boroughs are 2004. The others will follow over the encouraged to explain how their next year. In parallel to the SRDF and to transport proposals and policies complement the Economic facilitate the implementation of Development Strategy (EDS), the LDA is transport improvements for developing Sub-Regional Economic Opportunity Areas, particularly in terms Frameworks (SREFs) with the GLA and of sustainable transport. local partners. LIP Guidance 200441

6.2.3 Supplementary Planning 6.3 Further general information Guidance23 The Mayor has a statutory duty to The GLA, with support from TfL contribute towards the achievement of where appropriate, is producing sustainable development in the UK, the Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) promotion of equality of opportunity and Best Practice Guides to add detail for all people and improvements in the to London Plan policies. For example, health of Londoners through his SPG on 'Land for Transport' will include policies. The Mayor’s vision of London guidance on where TfL is seeking is for an exemplary sustainable world support from boroughs to improve city. This guidance therefore public transport infrastructure such as encourages boroughs to have regard to interchanges and bus stations. This is these factors in developing their LIPs expected to be published in draft in (refer to 4.5). August 2004. 6.3.1 Sustainable development 6.2.4 Other London planning issues The Mayor has published several Other relevant planning initiatives to strategies relating to the environment consider in LIP preparation include: and sustainable development (Table 6-1, The Government’s ‘Sustainable page 37). For example, the Energy communities’ approach for the Strategy sets a target for a 20 percent South-East which includes specific reduction in CO2emissions from 1990 reference to the Thames Gateway levels by 2010. Boroughs must The new Urban Development consider including measures in their Corporation (UDC) for Thames LIPs that contribute to meeting this Gateway and Thurrock and other targets in these strategies. The Government’s focus on ‘growth The Mayor’s Energy, Air Quality and corridors’ (e.g. Stansted and Waste Management Strategies promote Cambridge, Thames Valley) and sustainable procurement by the public exploiting the investment in high sector in London. Boroughs must take quality transport links e.g. the account of these strategies in Channel Tunnel Rail Link developing their LIPs. Relevant developments occurring as part of the London Olympics bid 6.3.2 Equalities for 2012. In the MTS, the Mayor makes a clear commitment to developing an inclusive transport system that takes accounts of 6.2.5 Unitary Development Plans the needs of all Londoners. The MTS (UDPs) also recognises the key role that As far as is appropriate and practicable, transport plays in addressing social LIPs are encouraged to also be exclusion by providing access to jobs, consistent with boroughs’ existing education, services and facilities. In or emerging UDPs/Local Development addition, the Mayor is under a statutory Frameworks and have regard to duty to promote equality of the developments referred to in opportunity and will need to take Sections 6.2.2, 6.2.3 and 6.2.4. account of this when assessing LIPs.

23. http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/sds/spg.jsp 42 Transport for London

Boroughs should demonstrate how arising from the Race Relations their LIPs will meet the equality and Amendment Act and the Disability inclusion objectives set out in the Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 (see MTS and include proposals responding Appendix B). to requirements in the matrix (Appendix C). Boroughs should address TfL will publish a toolkit for carrying out the transport barriers for equality target EQIAs in summer 2004 on the TfL groups (as defined by the GLA and Borough Extranet to assist boroughs other groups): and help achieve a consistent approach. Women Black and minority ethnic people 6.3.3 Health In developing the MTS, a Health Impact Children and young people Assessment was undertaken. This Older people contributed to the development of the Disabled people final strategy, which is considered to be positive in its heath impacts overall. In Lesbians, gay men, bisexual and developing their LIPs, boroughs are trans-gender people encouraged to have regard to promoting People from different faith groups. the health of people in Greater London.

To assist the Mayor’s assessment 6.3.4 100 Public Spaces of LIPs, boroughs are strongly Proposal 4G.11 in the MTS refers to the recommended to undertake an Equality emphasis to be given to environmental Impact Assessment (EQIA) to improvements in town centres. The demonstrate that their LIP does not Mayor’s programme for 100 public have a negative impact on a particular spaces is in part an evolution of these equality target group, or that any proposals and boroughs are asked to adverse impacts identified have been take account of, and wherever possible, appropriately mitigated. This EQIA will to promote, the transport aspects of assist the Mayor’s assessment of LIPs this programme in their LIPs. In some and will also help demonstrate that cases, 4G.10 (Streets-for-People) will boroughs are meeting their duties under also be relevant. relevant legislation, such as obligations LIP Guidance 2004 43

7. Proposed LIP format

7.1 Introduction the contents of one LIP to another. As set out in section 3.4 of this This should have a number of benefits, guidance, section 146 of the GLA Act particularly during consultation and states that the Mayor can only approve evaluation, and enable the LIP process a LIP where he/she considers: to be more effective and transparent.

The LIP is consistent with the MTS Boroughs must prepare LIPs to address the statutory targets and priority areas The proposals contained in the LIP for implementation, listed in Table 4-1. are adequate for the purposes of the In addition, using the matrix in implementation of the MTS Appendix C, LIPs must include The timetable for implementing responses to the mandatory those proposals and the date by requirements of the MTS and may which proposals are to be include requirements that are described implemented, are adequate for as ‘encouraged’ (see 7.2.5). those purposes. 7.2 LIP structure and content Boroughs are therefore strongly The structure has been devised to encouraged to follow the suggestions enable boroughs to prepare a on format and content defined in this substantive, yet understandable, LIP chapter. A common structure to all that can be used effectively. To assist LIPs will make it easier to find boroughs, Table 7-1 sets out a standard information and to relate and compare list of contents.

Table 7-1: Standard LIP list of contents

Chapter Heading

1 Local socio-economic / demographic context 2Local transport context 3 Borough policy statement 4Equality Impact Assessment 5 LIP proposals for MTS priority areas, targets and Appendix C 6Road safety plan 7Parking and enforcement plan 8 School travel plan strategy 9Performance measures 10 Consultation results 11 Borough core capacity statement 12 Funding implications 44 Transport for London

Paragraphs 7.2.1 to 7.2.12 below provide version of the matrix in Appendix C. more detail on the information For example, this might help clarify boroughs are strongly recommended to where a borough has already completed include as part of their LIP in relation to an activity or where a borough does not each of the topics in table 7-1. need to participate in a particular Reference is also made in section 7.2.5 activity for reasons of geography etc. to those activities required to cover the MTS priority areas for implementation This section, with any supporting cross- and the statutory targets in table 4-1 references and appendices, should also and those activities required under the be the primary source of explanation of matrix in Appendix C. where a borough has no or limited proposals against a priority, target or 7.2.1 Local socio-economic / mandatory requirement potentially demographic context applicable to it (see Form 2, section A brief geographical and demographic 7.2.5). description of the borough should be provided. This is intended to assist in 7.2.4 Equality Impact Assessment understanding the context of borough Where a borough has undertaken an activities included in the plan. It is EQIA of its LIP, it should summarise the recommended that boroughs provide a key outcomes and actions arising from map with key locations and transport this EQIA in relation to local links identified. Key diagrams from the implementation of the Mayor’s Unitary Development Plan/Local Transport Strategy (see Section 6.3.2 Development Framework may also above). be included. 7.2.5 LIPs proposals relating to MTS 7.2.2 Local transport context priority areas, targets and Appendix C This section should provide background In order for the Mayor to ascertain on local transport services, problems whether a LIP can be approved, it needs and opportunities, including those to include sufficient information for him that result from local infrastructure, to reach a judgement as to whether it land-use developments and satisfies the conditions set out in regeneration. section 146 of the GLA Act. A LIP must therefore set out the borough’s 7.2.3 Borough policy statement proposals across the full range of its Boroughs should set out a position activities relevant to implementation of statement describing their local policies the MTS. In particular, proposals are supporting the relevant policies from required that cover the eight MTS Chapter 3 of the MTS. Where priority areas for implementation and appropriate, this should include links to the statutory targets described in Table the UDP/LDF, Community Strategic 4-1 of this guidance. LIPs must also Plan, existing transport policy and other include proposals for the mandatory relevant borough documents. It is not activities (activities boroughs ‘must’ necessary for this statement to cover undertake) set out in the matrix in MTS policies that have no relevance to Appendix C. Boroughs are also the borough. But it may be helpful to encouraged to incorporate proposals record the fact that particular MTS relating to the discretionary activities policies are not relevant in a working (activities boroughs are ‘encouraged to’ LIP Guidance 2004 45

undertake) in the same matrix. As The anticipated cost of the proposal mentioned in Section 4.3, approval of a The likely sources of income LIP will include a determination as to How much funding, if any, is required whether it addresses the ‘musts’ in the matrix and a LIP will not fail on the from TfL basis of items that are ‘encouraged.’ Key dependencies and risks Which Mayoral priority areas, MTS As stated in Section 3.4 of this policies and proposals (set out in guidance, the relevant policies, Appendix C) targets and cross- planning, implementation mechanisms cutting goals the proposal supports and co-ordination activities relevant to The impact of the proposal on implementation of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy will include: cross-cutting goals (including impact on E&I Target Groups) Schemes, projects and programmes of physical works (e.g. installing bus The impact of the proposal on lanes, safety schemes, new cycling different transport modes. facilities) Comparing and evaluating borough LIPs Schemes projects and programmes will be much easier if this information is which focus on promotion, provided in a consistent format. As marketing and information stated in Section 3.4 of this guidance, dissemination (e.g. workplace travel Appendix F therefore includes two plans, travel information, city car forms. These are: clubs or car sharing schemes)

Further development of local plans LIP Proposal Delivery Form (Form 1), and policies (e.g. transport plans, which captures the essential details Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and summary of a borough proposal policies) to implement the MTS Co-ordination and collaboration activities (e.g. with other Local LIP Proposal Summary Sheet (Form Authorities, in Freight Quality 2), which enables proposals entered Partnerships, with other local on Forms 1 to be indexed against transport related forums). the MTS in a convenient summary format. For each of the discrete proposals in a LIP, information should be provided on: As stated in Section 3.4.1, the use of What the proposal is, including the these forms (subject to any agreed type of activity and the main variations) is strongly recommended to components facilitate LIP preparation and evaluation. Boroughs are therefore strongly Where it will take place, if encouraged to use these forms in appropriate (e.g. in the case of completing their LIP and are reminded physical works) of the possible reasons for delay in When it will take place (e.g. approving a LIP set out in Section 3.4. continuous, recurring or start dates) Appendix F sets out guidance on and when it will be implemented completing the forms. 46 Transport for London

TfL may seek further information from a 7.2.10 Consultation results borough where the information A summary report giving the results of provided in a LIP is insufficient to the borough’s consultation and listing determine whether it satisfies the the consultees should be included in conditions set out in Section 146 of the the LIP. Particular attention should be GLA Act. given to summarising responses from statutory consultees, adjacent boroughs 7.2.6 Road safety plan and neighbouring Local Authorities, in The requirement for Road Safety Plans the case of outer London boroughs. is provided in the matrix in Appendix C under 4G.Pr7. This part of a LIP may be 7.2.11 Borough core capacity used to support proposals entered on statement LIP Proposal Delivery Forms (Forms 1) Boroughs should summarise the core using cross-references. Boroughs with capacities they have or expect to have an existing Road Safety Plan may review over the period of the LIPs. This or update this rather than complete a provides the opportunity to set out new plan, according to their normal those matters introduced in the final practice. paragraph of Section 3.2 and covering those job positions, systems, 7.2.7 Parking and enforcement plan equipment, infrastructure and other The requirement on Parking and non-financial resources relevant to the Enforcement Plans is provided in the delivery of LIPs. Where possible, matrix in Appendix C under 4G.Pr17. existing reports or analyses should be Guidance on Parking and Enforcement used or adapted for this purpose. Plans is set out in Appendix E of this guidance. Similar to Road Safety Plans, 7.2.12 Funding implications an existing plan may be reviewed or Boroughs should include an overall updated and cross-references referring annual summary of the expected to it inserted into the appropriate LIP financial implications of their LIP. This Proposal Delivery Forms. is expected to equal the total of the costs and funding sources identified in 7.2.8 School travel plan strategy all its Forms 1 and categorise the main Boroughs are preparing School Travel costs, distinguishing between Plan Strategies during 2004 and the components of revenue and capital latest version of this strategy should expenditure. The summary should also form part of the LIP. Similarly to Parking identify major annual or recurring and Enforcement Plans, there may be programmes of projects (e.g. safer a number of LIP proposals arising and routes to schools, principal road which should be recorded on LIP maintenance). All individual capital Proposal Delivery Forms cross- items of greater than £2m should be referenced to this strategy. itemised in this table, reflecting TfL’s business case threshold. The proposed 7.2.9 Performance measures format is set out in Table 7-2 and will be Performance indicators and LIP provided in Excel format by TfL for monitoring, together with a suggested boroughs to use. TfL will investigate reporting structure, are discussed in using local government finance returns Chapter 5. LIPs should set out the formats and headings and provide an available baseline information and opportunity for borough comments boroughs should indicate how the before the table is finalised. relevant indicators will be reported. LIP Guidance 2004 47

Table 7-2: Summary of LIP funding Year of Delivery 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/9

Tot al Costs

Council Tax Net Parking Revenue Revenue Support Grant Section 106 BSP Other TfL

SRB / ODPM24 BIDs25 Private Finance Initiative Prudential Borrowing Other Tot al Sources

Financial estimates over this period can Section 3.2). It would be helpful for be complex and are subject to change boroughs to include a summary of any for a number of reasons, some of which major risks associated with the funding are outside the control of boroughs. assumptions adopted that may Where TfL has provided indications of significantly impact on delivery of LIPs. its funding, divergence from them It is especially important that boroughs should be clearly explained, as should include an assessment on likely means the general assumptions boroughs of bridging gaps between income and make for other funding streams (refer to costs in the above table.

24. Including PSA 25. Business Improvement Districts or equivalent 48 Transport for London

Submission of a LIP with large Accompanying local area project unexplained gaps between intentions to maps to be to a stated scale and spend and ability to fund may cause referenced within the LIP delay to, or non-approval of, the LIP. appropriately: Suggested maps could include: 7.3 Further format advice Town and District Centres / Key This is a list of suggestions that Public spaces boroughs are encouraged to follow: Rail, Light Rail, Tram and Bus All sections and sub-sections to be routes, existing and proposed numbered and listed in a table of contents Walking Corridors, existing and proposed All graphs, maps, tables and appendices to be numbered and Cycle Routes, existing and separately listed in a table of proposed. contents Boroughs should provide both Cross-references between LIP electronic and hard copy versions of proposals and the relevant their LIPs as set out in Table 7-3. performance indicators to be The electronic versions should be included provided in MS Word format, except the Approved LIP, which should be ‘pdf’.

Table 7-3 LIP copies submission to the Mayor and TfL TfL The Mayor

Consultation LIP Electronic Hard Electronic Hard Yes 20 No No Final LIP Electronic Hard Electronic Hard Yes 20 Yes 10

Approved LIP Electronic Hard Electronic Hard Yes 20 Yes 10 TfL copies to: Director, Borough Partnerships and [email protected] LIP Guidance 2004 49

Appendix A: Legal Framework for Local Implementation Plans and targets Introduction In particular, it must contain: The following is a brief summary of the a timetable for implementing the legal framework in relation to Local different proposals in the plan; and Implementation Plans and the setting of the date by which all the proposals Targets. All references are to the in the plan are implemented (section Greater London Authority Act 1999, 145(3)). unless stated. In preparing a LIP each London Local Implementation Plans Authority must consult: The Mayor’s Transport Strategy provides the relevant Police Commissioner the policy framework for a number of or Commissioners; bodies, including the London Borough Transport for London; Councils and the Common Council (called collectively the London such organisations representative of Authorities). disabled persons as the council considers appropriate; The Greater London Authority Act 1999 each other London Borough council provides that the London Authorities whose area is, in the opinion of the must implement the Strategy in two council preparing the local ways. implementation plan, likely to be affected by the plan; and First, in exercising any function the any other person required to London Authority must ‘have regard to be consulted by the direction of the transport strategy’ (section 144). The Mayor may also issue guidance the Mayor. about the implementation of the Strategy to London Authorities (section Each London Borough Council must 144(2)) which they must have regard to submit the LIP for the Mayor’s approval in exercising any function (section (section 146(1)). 144(3)). It is pursuant to this power that the current Guidance has been The Mayor cannot approve a LIP unless prepared. he or she considers that: it is consistent with the Strategy; Secondly, ‘as soon as reasonably that the proposals contained in the practicable’ after the Mayor has LIP are adequate for the purposes published the Transport Strategy, each of the implementation of the London Authority is required to prepare Strategy; and a Local Implementation Plan (LIP) (section 145). that the timetable for implementing the proposals and the end date The LIP sets out its proposals for the by which the proposals are implementation of the Transport implemented are adequate Strategy in the London Authority’s area. (section 146(3)). 50 Transport for London

The Mayor may also issue directions to Targets the London Authorities under section Section 41(9) of the Act provides that 153. The London Authorities ‘shall the Mayor shall from time to time set comply with any direction’. A direction such targets with the respect of the may cover any matter relating to how a implementation of any strategy…as London Authority exercises its LIP he may consider appropriate, having functions. regard to: (a) any related targets or objectives Directions can be general or specific set nationally; and may cover such matters as: (b) any performance indicators set by the timetable for completing or the Secretary of State, whether revising a LIP; nationally or locally; the bodies or persons that must be and in setting any such targets the consulted in preparation of a LIP; Mayor shall seek to ensure that they timetables and dates within the LIP; are no less demanding than any related actions to be taken to implement targets or objectives set nationally. the proposals in the LIP; and In addition, when implementing steps to be taken to remove the any Strategy, the Mayor must have effects of an action which is regard to: incompatible with the proposals in (a) the need to ensure that the strategy the LIP (section 153(2)). is consistent with national policies The Mayor has extensive powers to and with such international prepare the LIP if an Authority fails to obligations as are notified by the prepare one that is in his or her opinion Secretary of State; adequate (section 147). The Mayor can (b) the need to ensure the Strategy is recover the cost of doing so from the consistent with other Mayoral London Authority as a civil debt Strategies; (section 147). Also, where the Mayor considers that the London Authority (c) the resources available for the has failed ‘or is likely to fail’ to implementation of the Strategy; implement any proposal within the LIP (d) the desirability of promoting and he can exercise on behalf of the London encouraging the use of the River Authority its powers and recover the costs of doing so (section 152). Thames safely, in particular for the provision of passenger transport The Act states that a London Authority services for the transportation of may revise its LIP at any time and freight. (section 41(5)). must consider the need to do so when the Transport Strategy is revised There is no statutory requirement (section 148). to consult on targets. LIP Guidance 200451

Appendix B: Summaries of Relevant Equality and Inclusion Legislation Equality and Inclusion reasonable adjustments to Legislation accommodate the needs of a disabled The following sections give brief person where the employer’s working introductions to the legislation that has arrangements or premises place the implications for boroughs in preparing disabled person at a substantial their LIPs. disadvantage.

Race26 Transport Infrastructure is covered by Part III of the Act, placing a The Race Relations Act 1976, as responsibility on the service provider to amended by the Race Relations make ‘reasonable’ adjustments to its (Amendment) Act (RRAA) 2000, makes policies, practices and procedures to it unlawful to discriminate against make the service accessible to disabled anyone on the grounds of race, colour, people. The first part of Part III of the nationality, or ethnic or national origin. Act has been in force since 1999. The The Act applies to discrimination in second part of Part 3 of the Act comes employment, education, housing and into force in October 2004 and deals the provision of goods, facilities and with changes to the physical fabric of services (including the provision of the infrastructure. Service providers are facilities for travel and transport). required to take reasonable steps to In broad terms, the RRAA outlaws ‘remove physical barriers’ to make the three types of behaviour: direct service accessible. discrimination, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Disability Discrimination Act

27 (Amendment) Regulations 2003 will Disability amend the DDA 1995 to ensure the Act The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) is consistent with the requirements of 1995 prohibits discrimination against the EU Employment Framework disabled people. The DDA applies to Directive. Changes will include the discrimination in employment, removal of the small employer education and the provision of goods, exemption and currently excluded facilities and services. Part V of the Act categories of employment, and the deals specifically with public transport. extension of the act to cover the police, partnerships, barristers, qualification The DDA protects disabled persons bodies and more office and post- against discrimination by employers in holders. The regulations come into all aspects of employment. The Act force October 2004. imposes a duty on employers to make

26. More information on the Race Relations Acts at http://www.cre.gov.uk/ 27. More information on the Disability Discrimination Act http://www.drc-gb.org/ 52 Transport for London

Human Rights Act 199828 marital status. Like the Race Relations The Human Rights Act applies to Act, the Sex Discrimination Act outlaws public authorities and incorporates three types of behaviour: direct ‘Convention rights’ into UK law. These discrimination (including sexual are rights proclaimed by the European harassment), indirect discrimination Convention of Human Rights e.g. the and victimisation. right to respect for private and family life and the right to freedom of The Sex Discrimination Act does not expression. These rights may be used cover discrimination on the ground of to extend protection to individuals, who sexual orientation. otherwise are not protected by UK discrimination law (for example, gay Sexual Orientation and men and women, and religious and Religion30 political groups). The Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003 and the Sex29 Employment Equality (Religion and The Equal Pay Act 1970 aims to Belief) Regulations 2003 came into counteract sex discrimination in force in December 2003. employment contracts. Despite its name, the Equal Pay Act prohibits The Regulations will make it unlawful to discrimination in relation to contractual discriminate against job applicants and terms generally (including terms relating employees on the grounds of their to matters other than pay, but excluding sexual orientation, religion or belief. non-contractual benefits, which are The Regulations are drafted to be governed by the Sex Discrimination consistent with existing legislation in Act 1975). other areas so they include direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, The Sex Discrimination Act covers not harassment and victimisation. only discrimination in employment, but other areas as well, such as education The Regulations will apply to and the provision of goods, facilities employment but unlike the existing and services. The Sex Discrimination discrimination legislation, not to the Act makes it unlawful to discriminate provision of goods and services. against anyone on the grounds of sex or

28. More information on the Human Rights Act at http://www.humanrightsni.gov.uk 29. More information on Equal Pay and Sex Discrimination Acts at http://www.eoc.org.uk/ 30. More information on Employment Equality Regulations 2003 at http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/equality/ LIP Guidance 2004 53

Appendix C: Transport Strategy LIP ‘MATRIX’ MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 54 RefPPriority Policy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 3.Po5 Policy 3 Po5:The GLA and TfL will work with the The London Plan was published in Boroughs are encouraged to set out London boroughs to promote and support sustainable February 2004. their planning policy context and any forms of residential and town centre development, plans to amend it in line with the including: applying Sustainable Residential Quality London Plan. Boroughs are also principles for residential areas; ensuring residential encouraged to support improved developments are located within easy reach of existing public transport and pedestrian or new public transport links; seeking to improve public environments as well as sustainable transport access and the pedestrian environment in forms of residential and town centre town centres. development.

3.Po6 Policy 3 Po6: Transport initiatives and plans will TfL, in association with the boroughs Boroughs are encouraged to include, contribute to improving the cultural life of London and the SRA, is developing a where relevant, their transport plans by, for example: supporting growth in tourism, sport transport plan to support the 2012 associated with the cultural life of and the cultural, and creative industries in London; Olympic bid. London. providing improvements to off peak and night time services in those areas where there is demand for Boroughs are also encouraged to these services; ensuring that transport services and indicate what transport schemes, if infrastructure are in place to enable London to host any, they are proposing as part of the major cultural and sporting events; enhancing the value overall transport plan for the London of London’s streets and other public spaces as places Olympics 2012. for recreation and cultural events where appropriate; protecting the transport heritage whilst adopting high standards of contemporary design.

3.Po7 Policy 3.Po7: In exercising his functions in relation to The London Plan was published Boroughs must demonstrate how planning applications, draft Unitary Development Plans February 2004, which included they give due weight to these and other land use matters the Mayor will give due updated parking standards. matters. In particular how they weight to the matters listed below. The London Development plans should be support the location of high density boroughs should also give due weight to these matters in general conformity with the trip generating development in areas in exercising their functions in relation to planning London Plan. that have or will have both high levels applications and development plans, where of public transport accessibility and appropriate: that development should be planned and capacity, sufficient to meet the needs located with the aim of providing a range of attractive of development and how parking MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 55 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans and convenient travel choices, and encouraging provision reflects levels of public alternatives to car use, in accordance with Planning transport accessibility. Boroughs are Policy Guidance Note 13 (PPG13)6; in particular, new encouraged to include reference high density trip generating development should be to the use of ‘Public Transport located in areas that are, or will be made, accessible by Accessibility Levels’ as a tool for public transport, taking account of public transport assessing public transport capacity; the management of parking; in the interim, accessibility. until the London Plan (Spatial Development Strategy) is finalised, boroughs should have regard to the standards for employment generating uses (A2/B1) as set out in London Planning Guidance, RPG3 {16}, and modified by Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9)2.

The London boroughs should also have regard to the parking standards for residential dwellings set out in the Government’s Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing (PPG3)17, the former London Planning Advisory Committee’s policies for sustainable residential quality(12), and the possibility of applying stricter standards; the need to support and enhance the role of London’s town centres by providing sustainable access through land-use planning, development and transport policies, in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 6 (PPG6)18; the provision of developer contributions for transport measures where appropriate and reasonably related to the development proposal; the provision of transport assessments for mayor new trip generating development proposals - these should include information about how travel behaviour will be influenced by the proposed development, and how public transport, walking and cycling will be encouraged. Workplace travel plans should be produced where appropriate. MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 56 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 3.Po8 Policy 3.Po8: TfL, the GLA, and the London The spatial development strategy is Boroughs are encouraged to include Development Agency will work together and with other set out in the London Plan, published evidence of support for high quality, key partners to identify and promote: suitable sites for in February 2004. higher density and mixed use high quality, carefully designed, higher density and development in locations where there mixed use development in locations where there are Development plans should be are, or will be, high levels of public high levels of public transport access and capacity; in general conformity with the transport accessibility and capacity. sustainable forms of land use and transport in London Plan. London’s suburbs to improve the quality of access for Boroughs are also encouraged to the 60% of Londoners who live there; highly accessible provide evidence of the provision of ‘hub’ nodes which could act as key development and suitable sites for public transport interchange points and, where appropriate, also link and freight distribution centres and with regeneration initiatives; suitable sites across interchanges. London for passenger transport purposes such as bus depots, and for goods such as distribution centres and freight interchanges; suitable sites for a small number of major freight interchanges between road, rail, and water with high multi-modal accessibility, which support sustainable economic development.

3.Po9 Policy 3.Po9: Transport initiatives and plans should TfL established an Equality and Boroughs are encouraged to include support social inclusion by taking account of the needs Inclusion Team in 2002 to mainstream actions to support adequate of all Londoners to access jobs, facilities and services social inclusion issues throughout transport provision for deprived areas through: taking account of the particular needs of TfL. The Equality and Inclusion and all social groups, particularly deprived areas when determining programmes for Team reports to the Commissioner equality and inclusion target groups. transport improvements; addressing the needs of for Transport and provides a groups with specific travel requirements; introducing strategic resource to TfL to tackle equality policies to ensure that transport organisations’ discrimination, social inequality and workforces at every level fully reflect London, exclusion both within the workforce particularly by increasing the employment of women, and the transport services that it disabled people, and black and ethnic minority people provides. TfL have agreed with the at every level; and ensuring that transport workers Mayor, the GLA and the other particularly front line staff are trained to deal properly functional bodies to focus on the following groups: MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 57 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans with the diverse requirements of people using the -Women transport system, and continuing to ensure that all - Disabled people staff are protected from harassment and - People from black and minority discrimination. ethnic groups -Lesbians, gay men, bisexual and transgendered people - Older people, children and young people -People of faith and belief - Some groups are now protected by civil rights legislation as both users of services and as employees whilst others are protected by legislation only as employees (Sexual Orientation and Religion)

TfL have also committed to tackling exclusion of: -People on low incomes, unemployed people, job seekers and part time workers -People with caring responsibilities -Lone parents -Refugees and asylum seekers -TfL has clear responsibilities to ensure that its services and employment practices do not discriminate against individuals or groups MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 58 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 3.Pr1 V Proposal 3.Pr1: Specific proposals for taking forward Actions relating to issue-based Boroughs must state how they ensure Policy 3.9 include: establishing pan-London social group forums, Home Zones and Streets-for- that local voluntary and community and issue-based forums to provide input to the policy People are covered under specific organisations, including disabled development and implementation process, building on actions within the Mayor’s Transport groups, are fully consulted on existing arrangements - and TfL will prepare a report Strategy. TfL undertake Equalities relevant proposals developed by detailing the travel behavior and concerns of groups in Impact Assessment (EQIA) on their boroughs to meet these objectives. London with specific travel needs, and residents of proposals and projects to ensure deprived areas of London, with recommendations for activities do not disproportionately Boroughs must include information action; ensuring that measures to improve the quality disadvantage particular target groups. on Local Mobility Forums, where of the residential environment such as the Streets-for- The Budget and Equalities report, relevant. People areas and Home Zones proposed in Chapter which is published annually, examines 4G – Streets for All : improving London’s roads and the extent to which the functional streets, give particular priority to making improvements bodies are prioritising and improving in areas of high deprivation; ensuring that new equalities in their organisations and transport services and infrastructure protect and in delivery of their services’. This enhance community integration; improving safety and includes reporting of activities to security throughout the transport system; through the tackle social exclusion, and setting of proposals set out in Chapter 4 - improving London’s employment targets for equalities transport system; encouraging partnership working with groups within the TfL workforce. a range of organisations and institutions, such as the National Health Service, business and the London boroughs, to tackle these complex issues; requiring TfL to set priorities and targets for improving transport for a range of socially excluded groups as part of its business planning process; requiring TfL to develop an Action Plan, by the end of 2001, which works towards the proper representation of all Londoners in its workforce at all levels, with regular reporting of progress; ensuring that training programs recognise the diversity of travellers and staff, and that all users and staff are treated with respect. MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 59 Re fPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 3.Pr2 VI Proposal 3.Pr2: TfL and the GLA will take the lead The Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy was Boroughs must have regard to the in ensuring that transport initiatives and plans will published in September 2002. Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy and are contribute to improving air quality by: ensuring encouraged to set out how they are improved alternatives to use of the car are provided, The London Low Emission Zone addressing its priorities relevant to and encouraging a shift towards public transport, feasibility study was completed in their transport responsibilities. walking, and cycling; encouraging business to reduce July 2003. The Mayor’s 2004 the emission impacts and energy consumption of its election manifesto proposes an LEZ Boroughs must set out their policy transport activities; encouraging and promoting the should be implemented by 2007. response to they key proposal for benefits of the more rapid adoption of cost-effective an LEZ. cleaner technologies and fuels, non-fossil fuels, TfL has responsibilities for the TLRN. and zero emission technologies for all road vehicles Reference must be made to concentrating on the most polluting vehicles; ensuring boroughs’ Air Quality Management TfL and GLA vehicle fleets set a good example on Area Action Plans where relevant. emission reduction, and developing plans for reducing emissions from the taxi fleet (currently regulated by TfL), and the private hire vehicle (to be regulated by TfL); developing and implementing traffic management measures that reduce emissions and energy use as well as encouraging safe, economical and considerate driving; examining methods of reducing traffic pollution, including a joint feasibility study with the London boroughs, Government, the Association of London Government and others to consider the viability, costs, and benefits of one or more low emission zones in London. Business will also be involved through a consultative forum; supporting balanced and appropriate local transport measures proposed by the London boroughs to work towards the National Air Quality Objectives; working with the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions to identify whether additional national measures may be required to improve air quality, especially to reduce emissions of nitrogen dioxide (NO2). (Further details will be set out in the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy.) MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 60 Re fPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 3.Pr4 VI Proposal 3.Pr4: TfL will contribute to reducing traffic The London Plan was published in Boroughs must state their polices and transport noise by working with the boroughs and February 2004. with respect to traffic and transport local communities living adjacent to the TLRN to related noise and relevant borough develop a programme to reduce traffic noise in the The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy activities relating to reducing traffic worst affected areas – as first step, a report on this was published in March 2004. and transport related traffic noise. issue will be prepared by the end of 2002; ensuring that as the Underground is modernised, cost effective noise control engineering and management practices are adopted, and by working with the rail industry, promote the use of such measures on the National Rail Network; making use of cost effective low noise road surfaces and vehicles and designing traffic management measures to minimise noise; adopting cost effective operating techniques to minimise noise. (Further details of such measures will be set out in the Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy and the London Plan (Spatial Development Strategy.) 3.Pr5 VI Proposal 3.Pr5: TfL will contribute to the protection The Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy Boroughs are encouraged to have and enhancement of open space and biodiversity by: was published July 2002. regard to the Mayor’s Biodiversity undertaking surveys of biodiversity on its land; ensuring Strategy and also to include details that the potential for wildlife habitats on its land is of how they intend to protect realised where this does not conflict with the efficient and enhance natural habitats and operation of the transport system, or the safety or biodiversity along their transport personal security of travellers; promoting the routes (cycleways, verges etc.). responsible use of open space, the Thames and other waterways for movement whilst protecting their ecological and conservation value. (The Mayor and GLA will encourage other transport bodies to adopt similar practices.) 3.Pr6 VI Proposal 3.Pr6: To reduce the impact of the transport The Mayor’s Municipal Waste Boroughs must set out how they seek of waste: TfL will work with the boroughs, the SRA and Management Strategy was published to encourage the movement of waste other relevant partners to encourage the movement of in September 2003. by rail or water or otherwise reduce the impact of the transport of waste. MTS - Strategies LIP Guidance 2004 | 61 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans waste by rail and water, by for example ensuring that London Plan published February wharves and transfer stations that are, or could be 2004. reasonably made, viable for the movement of recyclable and residual waste and other materials are Proposals for additional safe-guarding safeguarded (see also proposals 4K.Pr4 and 4M.Pr2); of wharves are in the Safeguarding where transport of waste by road is unavoidable, cost Wharves on the River Thames: effective measures to mitigate environmental and road London Plan (Implementation Report), traffic impacts will be encouraged through partnership published in summer 2004. The (see proposal 4KPr2) and waste contracts. (Further Secretary of State is being requested details will be set out in the Mayor’s Waste Strategy.) to issue or withdraw safeguarding directions as appropriate.

Government and mayoral policy is for substantially greater self-sufficiency in management of waste with London boroughs.

3.Pr7 Proposal 3.Pr7: Transport initiatives and plans should The London Health Commission is Boroughs are encouraged to contribute to improving the health of all Londoners by: working with boroughs and other demonstrate how they will contribute promoting healthier methods of transport; encouraging agencies to assist in health promotion to improving the health of Londoners, organisations to review their own transport policies and and ensuring an integrated approach for example by promoting workplace practices and associated locational decisions from a to policy. and school travel plans and thus health promotion perspective; improving the reducing accidents. environment in which Londoners live and work; improving transport safety, especially reducing road Boroughs are also encouraged to traffic accidents and fatalities; providing access to key review and summarise how they services and facilities; taking account of inequalities in interact with the London Health health and environmental quality across London in Commission on transport related deciding which transport improvements have priority. activities.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - London Underground LIP Guidance 2004 | 62 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4C.Pr12 Proposal 4C.Pr12: TfL and London Underground, the Crime and Disorder strategies Relevant boroughs are encouraged to London boroughs and other appropriate agencies, will published by boroughs for 2002-2005 include a reference to their crime and develop a programme of actions to address safety and London Underground 2003-2005. disorder strategies; indicate how and issues and personal security fears on the Underground when they will be updated and how and on journeys to and from Underground stations. the GLA and TfL will be consulted.

Relevant boroughs are encouraged to include ways in which they promote TfL's ‘Safer Travel and Night’ initiatives as well as their own proposals for improving personal safety and security in getting to and from the Underground (as well as DLR and national rail) stations.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - DLR and Croydon Tramlink LIP Guidance 2004 | 63 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4D.Pr3 Proposal 4D.Pr3: TfL and the boroughs will work to Enhancements of CCTV cameras at Relevant boroughs must set out their widen the benefit gained from the accessibility of the stations are completed. relevant planning policy context to Docklands Light Railway by making the surrounding CCTV on board trains is being improve accessibility to the DLR and street environment and supporting services equally installed progressively with the its surrounding environment and accessible. (TfL and London borough assessments rail-car refurbishment programme. services. of all DLR stations and their environs should be completed by 2003 including a programme of action.) Off station signage and public transport guides have been implemented in partnership with the London Boroughs of Lewisham, Tower Hamlets and Newham.

‘Minicablink’ to DLR is being trialled.

A programme has been developed to install real time information systems (Docklands Arrival Information Systems – DAISY) in public environ- ments including visitor attractions at Greenwich and new developments.

4D.Pr4 Proposal 4D.Pr4: The Docklands Light Railway’s London The Secretary of State granted TWA Relevant boroughs are encouraged to City Airport extension is supported with the aim of the Powers for the City Airport extension include infrastructure context plans scheme opening by 2004/5. The Mayor and TfL will in March 2002, construction began in for new DLR stations which identify explore the potential for additional extensions, 2003 with the expected completion how they are or will be integrated especially to facilitate regeneration. date being late 2005. Work continues into the surrounding area to improve on programme of land take and physical access. construction. In addition, relevant boroughs DLR has developed proposals for a are encouraged to outline their possible extension to Barking Reach. commitment to work with TfL to Three core options have been assist in the development of identified which will be subject to a proposals for DLR extensions. full appraisal in 2004. The feasibility MTS - DLR and Croydon Tramlink LIP Guidance 2004 | 64 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans of possible DLR extensions to Barking Reach forms a key part of TfL’s strategy for transport improvements in the Thames Gateway.

DLR has been working with the SRA on proposals for conversion of the North London Line south of Stratford to DLR operation. This would provide a new DLR corridor with additional stations and a link to Stratford International Station. TfL and DLR will continue to discuss the transfer of this under- utilised heavy rail line for conversion to DLR with the SRA. 4D.Pr5 Proposal 4D.Pr5: The integration of Tramlink with other Mulitimodal signing was completed in Relevant boroughs are encouraged transport services will be pursued by developing 2001. Local area maps at all stops to include projects to address these interchanges, improving local information and signing, were provided in 2001. A study on issues. modifying bus routes, maximising access by walking access and integration was carried and cycling, and providing facilities for park and ride out prior to Tramlink opening. The where appropriate. These will help Tramlink increase its boroughs are progressing works to share of the transport market (Programme for the full improve conditions at specific stops. integration of Tramlink with other services to be Bus routes were modified as part of brought forward during 2002.) the public transport restructuring upon the introduction of Tramlink in 2000. A post introduction network review is underway by TfL. Tramlink has included the smartcard (Oyster card) network from Spring 2004 and fares are now integrated with bus fares. TfL working with LB Croydon on a feasibility study to improve interchange at West Croydon. MTS - DLR and Croydon Tramlink LIP Guidance 2004 | 65 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4D.Pr6 V Proposal 4D.Pr6: TfL and the London boroughs will A study on access and integration Relevant boroughs must include work to widen the benefit gained from the accessibility was carried out prior to Tramlink projects which will widen accessibility of Tramlink by making the surrounding street opening. Boroughs are now gains from Tramlink and identify environment and supporting services equally progressing works to improve benchmark accessibility standards accessible. (TfL and London borough assessments conditions at specific stops. they will use and measures of of all Tramlink stops and their environs should be success. completed by 2003 including a programme of action.)

4D.Pr7 Proposal 4D.Pr7: The Mayor will explore the potential Extension priorities were agreed by Relevant boroughs are encouraged to for extending the Tramlink network where doing so the Mayor during 2003 and relevant include any measures or proposals could help meet the objectives of the Transport London boroughs informed. being taken to support this proposal. Strategy cost effectively. (Initial views on the viability of proposed extensions should be established by Consultants have been appointed Summer 2002.) to examine heavy rail conversion opportunities for a link between Wimbledon and Sutton, and from Crystal Palace to Croydon/ Beckenham.

Limited analysis and alignment engineering will be carried out for Streatham – Purley and Sutton – Tooting on-street alignments in consultation with affected borough staff. TfL will keep relevant boroughs updated on progress.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - National Rail LIP Guidance 2004 | 66 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4E.Pr7 Proposal 4E.Pr7: TfL will work with the SRA, Network The South London Metro project was Boroughs are encouraged to set out, Rail, the train operating companies and the London launched in September 2003. It is in this regard, their planning policy boroughs to identify a phased programme, being marketed as the ‘Overground context and any plans to amend it in co-ordinated with franchise replacement, for the Network’ or ‘ON’ and is aimed at line with the London Plan. implementation of the London Metro concept, increasing off-peak use of rail by including OrbiRail. (The programme will be published residents and businesses within the in 2002.) catchment area of target stations.

TfL in conjunction with the SRA and South London TOCs, also promote National Rail services through integrated marketing and station enhancements. Initially the project has concentrated on the 41 stations along four pilot routes: Waterloo to Teddington via Wimbledon, Waterloo to Twickenham via Richmond Victoria to East and West Croydon via Norbury and London Bridge to Dartford via Greenwich.

TfL has an outline programme for future phases of ON. The detail of this depends partly on the future funding settlement and partly on the detail of new operator franchises. TfL is in the course of firming up the programme. MTS - National Rail LIP Guidance 2004 | 67 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4E.Pr8 Proposal 4E.Pr8: TfL will work with the SRA to ensure: The London Sustainable Distribution Boroughs are encouraged to identify additional network capacity for freight is provided to Partnership (LSDP) has undertaken sites for freight handling in their tackle existing pinch-points and to ensure that the three studies to consider these planning documents. growth in rail freight does not impose limitations on issues: existing or planned passenger services; the 1) A review of North London development of freight bypass routes around London, Line capacity, See Proposal wherever possible removing non-London traffic from 4E.Pr.6 above dense residential areas and releasing capacity for 2) A Rail Freight Strategy Study which expanded passenger services and London-based reviewed general freight issues and freight. identified how to shift from road to rail 3) Urban Freight Delivery Concept Study.

4E.Pr9 V Proposal 4E.Pr9: TfL will work with the SRA, the Train Improvements to stations on the Boroughs must include supporting Operating Companies and the London boroughs to North London Line, South West measures/schemes and must include significantly improve the sense of security felt by rail Trains and South Central are under a reference to their crime and passengers when using rail stations, and to raise more discussion, part of which is to disorder strategies; indicate how and stations in London to the ‘Secure Stations’ standard. increase the number of secure when they will be updated and how stations within London. TfL’s input the GLA and TfL will be consulted will include developing standards for (as per 4C.Pr12). station facilities ensuring improved access and better cycle parking as Boroughs are encouraged to include part of the on-going franchising ways in which they promote TfL’s process. ‘Safer Travel at Night’ initiatives.

TfL has concluded funding arrangements with Chiltern Railways and Silverlink for a package of station improvements.

Wembley Stadium will undergo a package of works to significantly improve information provision as MTS - National Rail LIP Guidance 2004 | 68 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans well as upgrading seating and waiting facilities and the introduction of cycle racks for the first time.

Kew Gardens, South Acton and Gospel Oak will undergo measures to improve the station ambience and waiting facilities. This will complement the measures that Silverlink are undertaking to upgrade personal security and information at these stations.

Procurement of help points has been concluded with Connex and South Central Trains with an upgrade of South West Trains help points to give a standard facility across the region.

The provision of signage and welcome point panels for wayfinding information has been provided on the ON pilot routes.

TfL have completed, in partnership with boroughs and other local stakeholders, seven trial ‘Personal Security at Transport Interchanges’ projects. Four of these included NR stations and links to them. The projects improve the physical environment and its future management to enhance perceptions of security. Post implementation monitoring is complete. MTS - National Rail LIP Guidance 2004 | 69 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4E.Pr10 Proposal 4E.Pr10: TfL will consult with the SRA, The TfL Interchange Plan was Boroughs are encouraged to set Network Rail, the train operating companies and published in August 2002. This out their programme(s) to boroughs to develop and publish an interchange identified and prioritised locations for implement their elements of the improvement agenda to guide future implementation. improvement. TfL will continue to Interchange Plan. co-ordinate activities and identify priorities. 4E.Pr13 V Proposal 4E.Pr13: TfL will work with the SRA, Network TfL has ongoing liaison with SRA in Boroughs must set out programmes Rail, the Train Operating Companies and the London developing a plan for accessibility for for projects to contribute towards boroughs to identify and implement a London-wide London stations. improved accessibility of rail stations. programme of improved accessibility of National Rail stations, including the establishment of a core network The park-and-ride framework sees no of accessible stations. (The programme should be expansion of facilities in Travelcard agreed by the end of 2002.) zones 1-3 and expansion is to be considered in zones 4-6 only where it causes no net increase in total car kilometres. The framework will be published in summer 2004. Refer also to Proposal 4H.Pr2. 4E.Pr14 4E.Pr14: TfL will, in conjunction with the SRA, Network The framework sees no expansion of Boroughs are encouraged to set out Rail, Train Operating Companies and the London park-and-ride in Travelcard Zones 1-3 proposals, if any, for park-and-ride. boroughs, develop a framework by mid 2002 within and expansion in Zones 4-6 only which proposals for park-and-ride in London can be where it causes no net increase in considered, particularly in outer London where the total car kilometres. The framework issue has the most relevance. The framework will will be published in summer 2004. need to encompass both National Rail and London Refer also to Proposal 4H.Pr2. Underground stations. MTS - National Rail LIP Guidance 2004 | 70 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4E.Po3 Policy 4E.Po3: Network Rail, Train Operating See above 4E.Pr14. Boroughs are encouraged to include Companies and the London boroughs should consider a programme for review of existing proposals to increase parking to ensure they achieve a parking provision. net gain for sustainable modes from the car, and have regard to the local traffic, access and environmental impacts. The Mayor will have regard to these criteria in considering cases in which he has a planning remit.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - Bus LIP Guidance 2004 | 71 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4F.Pr2 II Proposal 4F.Pr2: TfL will devote greater resources to Senior Account Managers with Boroughs must demonstrate support reviewing and improving the performance and reliability responsibility for individual or small for the effective enforcement of bus of individual routes through more effective operational groups of operators are now in post. priority (see also Target 3, Proposal management, in partnership with the operators, Performance continues to improve. 4F.Pr7 and relevant policies in London boroughs and enforcement agencies. Chapter 4G of the MTS). Excess Waiting Time (EWT) on the network in 2003/04 is forecast to be Boroughs must develop and agree 1.5 minutes compared to 1.8 minutes Target 4 with TfL for improving in 2002/03. journey times by summer 2005.

Boroughs must set out their standards for gritting on bus routes during periods of cold weather. 4F.Pr3 II Proposal 4F.Pr3: TfL, with the operators, London The refurbished bus station at Boroughs must demonstrate their boroughs, and other interested parties, will ensure Victoria re-opened in September commitment to support provision of sufficient bus garage and standing facilities can be 2003 as planned. bus standing and garage facilities at provided to meet the needs of the London bus agreed locations in association with network, including the requirements of the revised A planning application has been London Buses, and identify projects contracting regime and to facilitate the expansion of submitted and detailed design work they are implementing. This must the network. commenced for a site at North include the development of Acton. The garage will become appropriate planning policies. operational in autumn 2004.

Land for Hammersmith bus station was acquired in 2002 and planning approval given to extend and improve the existing station.

A new bus garage is to be constructed at Hounslow in 2004 and a new bus station constructed during 2005/6. Proposals to be submitted to LB Hounslow in 2004 for planning approval. MTS - Bus LIP Guidance 2004 | 72 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans Construction has commenced on Walthamstow Bus station and was re-opened in June 2004. The former tram shed in Brixton Hill has been acquired to increase capacity for Brixton Garage. Plans have been developed to reopen Walworth Garage.

Land for Transport Users Supplementary Planning Guidance will be published.

4F.Pr6 II Proposal 4F.Pr6: Bus priority and protection against London has approximately 1000 bus Boroughs must detail effective bus congestion will be substantially increased on all bus lanes covering 250 kilometres, Traffic priority programmes dealing with routes London-wide, both in the amount of street signal Selective Vehicle Detection both streetspace allocation and hours space allocated and the time of operation. The current (SVD) priority has been introduced at of operation, to significantly reduce phase of the LBPN will be completed by April 2004. over 1000 junctions London-wide (at bus delay and journey time variability (Further extensions and co-ordination with the London March 2004) to provide bus journey across the bus network. Bus Initiative, and work undertaken by the sub-regional time and reliability savings. partnerships will be reviewed in light of this strategy’s objectives, and available resources.) 4F.Pr7 II Proposal 4F.Pr7: All bus routes will be effectively Note – this section is cross- Boroughs must include a summary enforced, to protect against illegal stopping and other referenced with Proposal 4G.Pr.4. or reference to the boroughs’ traffic offences, using cameras wherever possible. enforcement Service Level Emergency vehicles operated by the police, London TLRN: TfL Traffic Enforcement Agreements (or equivalent) with Ambulance Service or London Fire Service will be able Team is responsible for all camera TfL, and details of how these will be to use bus lanes at all times. All bus stops on routes enforcement of bus lanes on TLRN. regularly reviewed and monitored. with 24-hour bus services or routes in the London Bus Of the 419 bus lanes on the TLRN, Initiative or London Bus Priority Network will have 24 70% are now enforceable (all have Boroughs must set out the local cameras but only 70% have signs and clearways programme. MTS - Bus LIP Guidance 2004 | 73 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans hour bus stop clearways. At other stops there will be lines). There are 52 static cameras, a general presumption in favour of 24-hour clearways, 939 operational bus-mounted but as a minimum, there must be clearways that cover cameras and 255 CCTV cameras the operating hours of the bus route. operating on the TLRN. The target (Camera enforcement by April 2002 – see Proposal is 1042 bus mounted cameras. 4G.Pr4. Bus stop clearways programme to be covered in boroughs’ Parking and Enforcement BOROUGH BUS LANES: Thirty Plans, with completion by the end of 2006 – see London boroughs have signed Service Proposal 4G.Pr17.) Level Agreements (SLAs) with TfL to enable enhanced enforcement on LBI routes for static cameras (the remaining three will not have SLAs – Corporation of London is already well enforced, RBK&C has separate public services agreement with DfT, and Havering does not have sufficient LBI route within the Borough). TfL have funded 176 CCTV cameras via the SLAs on Borough roads. All bus stops on Red Routes are now 24 hour, seven day a week clearways.

4F.Pr8 III Proposal 4F.Pr8: TfL and the boroughs will promote The LBI Phase 1 programme was Boroughs must include agreed and implement a package of whole route enhanced, completed in 2003 and included programmes, plans and proposals intensified and enforced bus priority measures on delivery of a programme of three to demonstrate delivery of high levels major bus corridors. Together with other flagship routes incorporating whole of bus priority on ‘A’ Roads and Busy complementary measures, this will provide a high route bus priority measures. Bus Routes. quality, fully accessible bus network on the London Bus Initiative BusPlus routes. (The target date for the A further 43 routes were added to Boroughs must demonstrate that completion of Stage One is April 2002 and, by the the LBI programme in February 2001 - consistent and high levels of traffic end of 2002, elements complementary to central Phase 2. enforcement will be integral to London congestion charging scheme will be completed. their proposals and that there is High levels of priority will be given on all major bus consistency with the accessible bus corridors by 2011.) network proposals. MTS - Bus LIP Guidance 2004 | 74 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans The LBI Phase 1 and 2 schemes in the Boroughs must demonstrate that central area, which were needed to all boroughs’ road proposals and support Congestion Charging (CC), programmes include measures that were identified and implemented mitigate any significant adverse prior to the CC ‘go live’ date of mid impacts on buses on major bus February 2003. corridors.

LBI Phase 2, will be completed by April 2005.

The Transport Policing and Enforcement Directorate (TPED) was established in 2002 to bring all TfL enforcement activities together.

4F.Pr11 V Proposal 4F.Pr11: TfL and the London boroughs will As of October 2003, 40% Boroughs must set out their develop and implement a long-term programme so (approximately 1000) of the 2,500 programme for making all bus that all bus stops have appropriate passenger facilities bus stops on the 27 LBI 1 routes had stops accessible. and can be served effectively by low floor buses. (The been made fully accessible for initial phases will be included in the London Bus wheelchair users. Initiative, so will be delivered within the timetable of that programme. The Mayor wants TfL and the London The new aluminum post replacement boroughs to develop a further programme and costed programme has been completed, as timetable by early 2002.) has the programme to upgrade old- model bus shelters. By October 2003, 68% of all stops had a shelter (up from 58% in 1998).

Trials of solar-powered lighting of shelters and bus stop timetables are being conducted across London. The solar power stored during the day will MTS - Bus LIP Guidance 2004 | 75 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans be used to illuminate the timetable and stop signs at night improving visibility, safety and security for passengers.

By 31 March 2004, TfL had provided solar powered lighting to 150 unlit shelters.

4F.Pr21 IV Proposal 4F.Pr21: TfL will establish a partnership by the TfL assumed responsibility for Central London boroughs must end of 2001 to review arrangements for coach parking, convening the London Coach Forum include a commitment to produce facilities and terminals and to look at how to manage at the beginning of 2002. The first a strategy and programme for the negative environmental impacts of coach travel. meeting was held in March 2002. implementation of coach parking in This will build on the work of existing organisations and The forum includes representation cooperation with TfL. involve relevant interested parties, including the coach from the tourist and private hire industry, the London boroughs and the police. coach industry and local authorities. Other boroughs must include the The London Coach Parking Map has issue if appropriate. been updated with funding from TfL and was launched by the Mayor on 22 October 2002.

A leaflet describing good practice for coach drivers to minimise the environmental impact of coaches was also published.

An assessment of the scale of parking problems for coaches in the central area was undertaken during summer 2003. Initial findings were reported at the Coach Forum in October 2003. MTS - Bus LIP Guidance 2004 | 76 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans This work can now be taken forward to set priorities for coaches and other road users.

The London Development Agency (LDA) has recently commissioned a study into Coach Tourism in the capital.

Coach parking was identified in the Mayor’s plan for Tourism as an action for tourism product development. The study will look into parking and other issues surrounding coach tourism in Greater London.

The GLA has been monitoring work on coach tourism and has fed comments into the study being carried out on behalf of the LDA.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 77 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Pr1 IV Proposal 4G.Pr1: A London Motorcycle Working Group The London Motorcycle Working Boroughs must include details of will be established by TfL to include user groups, the Group was set up in October 2001 their strategy and programmes for police and the boroughs. This group’s work will include and meets quarterly. implementing powered two-wheeler measures to enhance and extend the provision of parking particularly in areas of high parking for motorcycles and mopeds, particularly in The Motorcycle bus lane pilot was demand. areas of high demand. Opportunities will be explored reviewed in November 2003 and to improve road safety and reduce emissions and noise pilots are to be extended to ensure pollution. It will also review the evidence and if sufficient data is available to appropriate consider experiments to allow motorcycles understand the benefits and and mopeds to share bus lanes. (Review of use of bus disbenefits. The review is due to lanes to be completed by the end of 2001.) report in summer 2004.

TfL commissioned the Transport Research Laboratory to undertake a parking/ demand study. This provides detailed information on parking locations and availability and will be published in 2004.

Research examining the benefits and disbenefits of motorcycle use in London has been undertaken by DfT working in partnership with TfL and will be published in summer 2004.

‘Bikesafe–London’ was developed in partnership with City Police and rider skills days started in April 2003. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 78 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Po2 III Policy 4G.Po2: In balancing the use of street space, No update. In balancing the use of street space account should be taken of the objectives of the boroughs must have regard to the Transport Strategy and the current London road presumptions set out in hierarchy. On the TLRN and most other ‘A’ Roads Policy 4G.Po2. there is a general presumption in favour of distribution, particularly for those making business journeys, bus passengers and commercial vehicle operators. On other London roads there is a presumption in favour of access and amenity, particularly for residents, buses, pedestrians and cyclists and where necessary, business access. 4G.Pr2 Proposal 4G.Pr2: TfL will work with the Police, the The Enforcement Task Force (ETF) Boroughs are encouraged to work Association of London Government, the boroughs, the was created to take forward the work with other agencies to improve data Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency and other relevant outlined in the Enforcement Plan. sharing protocols, including their parties to develop and begin implementation of the The ETF consists of the ALG, TfL, participation in or support of the Outline Enforcement Plan to deliver better traffic Metropolitan and City Police. The work of the ETF. enforcement and vehicle registration throughout purpose of the ETF is to improve Greater London. (Outline Enforcement Plan coordination of Traffic Enforcement implementation to begin by the end of 2002.) Strategy in London. The ETF established a sub group to develop ways to target known/persistent evaders, develop a London-wide Pound Strategy, improve sharing of information between authorities, and to pilot additional decriminalised powers of enforcement. 4G.Pr3 Proposal 4G.Pr3: TfL in conjunction with the London Under the London Local Authorities Boroughs are encouraged to set out boroughs will press the Government to introduce new and TfL Act 2003, boroughs and TfL any relevant plans. legislation to allow further non-endorsable traffic took over responsibility for enforcing offences to be enforced on all streets through the a number of traffic restrictions and decriminalised system. (New legislation to be issuing Penalty Charge Notices to introduced by the end of 2002.) motorists for traffic offences such MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 79 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans as U-turns and stopping in a box junction. The majority of the powers came into force on 30 December 2003, and are enforced by council parking attendants.

4G.Pr4 II Proposal 4G.Pr4: TfL, working with the police and the Note – this section is cross- Boroughs must include a programme London boroughs, will introduce camera enforcement referenced with Proposal 4F.Pr7. for bringing signage up to the on all 700 bus lanes in Greater London by April 2002. standards required by the DfT. (Completed by April 2002. Part of the London Bus TLRN: TfL Traffic Enforcement Initiative.) Team is responsible for all camera enforcement of bus lanes on TLRN. Of the 419 bus lanes on the TLRN, 70% are now enforceable (all have cameras but only 70% have signs and lines). There are 52 static cam- eras, 939 operational bus-mounted cameras and 255 CCTV cameras operating on the TLRN. The target is 1042 bus mounted cameras.

BOROUGH BUS LANES: Thirty London boroughs have signed Service Level Agreements (SLAs) with TfL to enable enhanced enforcement on LBI routes for static cameras (the remaining three will not have SLAs – Corporation of London is already well enforced, RBK&C has separate public services agreement with DfT, and Havering does not have sufficient LBI route within the Borough). MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 80 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans TfL have funded 176 CCTV cameras via the SLAs on Borough roads. All bus stops on red routes are now 24 hour, seven day a week clearways.

Approximately two third’s of London’s bus lanes are entirely on borough roads. Work is continuing to ensure orders, signs and lines are introduced to make all borough bus lanes enforceable. Joint Arrangements (JAs) have been agreed with 12 boroughs to enable boroughs to enforce penalties identified by TfL’s bus-mounted cameras. Work is continuing to secure JAs with the remaining boroughs.

4G.Pr7 I Proposal 4G.Pr7: TfL will develop, with the London The Road Safety Plan was published in Boroughs must include the latest boroughs, the police and other relevant organisations, November 2001. Annual monitoring version of their Road Safety Plan as the first London-wide Road Safety Plan. The London reports were published 2002 and an integral part of their LIP and must boroughs will be expected to adopt the approach set 2003. Work is being undertaken to explain how Target 1 is to be met out in the plan and to publish their own Road Safety update the Plan. locally. Plans as an integral part of their LIP, outlining how the target reductions are to be achieved locally. (London Boroughs must review their Road Road Safety Plan to be completed in Summer 2001. Safety Plan annually and provide Annual reports will be produced by TfL and boroughs progress updates. indicating progress towards the targets.) MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 81 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Pr9 I Proposal 4G.Pr9: The London boroughs and TfL Four sites on TLRN were included in Boroughs must include a programme should make greater use of their increased powers the 2002/03 budget. for the review of road safety around to introduce 20mph zones and speed limits, where - A10 Bishopsgate, subject to all primary and secondary schools appropriate. Priority will normally be given to discussions with City of London and, where relevant, other sites by residential areas with large numbers of children, such - A214 Ambleside Avenue 2008 with consideration given to use as outside schools. The London boroughs are also - A3 Kingston by-pass service roads of 20mph zones. encouraged to consider the use of Safer Routes to - A2 New Cross Road, in place for Schools and Home Zones to complement 20mph two years as an experiment - now speed limits. Consideration will be given to imple- being made permanent. menting 20mph areas, which include sections of the TLRN where there are very high pedestrian flows, road There are also approximately 30 sites safety problems, schemes can be effectively enforced, identified on borough roads. and are without detriment to priority traffic. £6.5m of 2004/05 BSP funding is being invested in a London-wide Safer Routes to School programme, and £6m for 20mph zones.

4G.Pr10 VI Proposal 4G.Pr10: The London boroughs will be A seminar on the area-based Boroughs must include a programme encouraged to design and manage appropriate local approach (including Streets-for- for identification and review of streets as ‘Streets-for-People’ areas emphasising their People) was held with boroughs/ potential schemes as well as function as social spaces. Priority will initially be given stakeholders in November 2002. programmes and funding to areas of high deprivation, regeneration areas and Detailed guidance on area-based assumptions for implementing in particular areas of high density neighbourhood schemes, based upon a plan-led agreed schemes and in particular renewal. TfL will co-operate with these initiatives approach, will follow with a view supporting the Mayor’s programme where they are likely to affect the operation of the to developing a prioritised list of for 100 public spaces. (See LIP TLRN. (Programme to start in 2003.) schemes. Guidance Chapter 7.)

Streets-for-People funding of about £5m has been provided for borough schemes in 2003/04 and £6m for 2004/05. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 82 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Pr11 VI Proposal 4G.Pr11: TfL will work with the London A seminar/workshop on the Boroughs must set out how they boroughs to develop a plan setting out a programme area-based approach (including Town plan to work jointly with TfL to of environmental street improvement schemes to Centres) was held with boroughs/ develop a plan of environmental improve the attractiveness of London’s town centres. stakeholders in November 2002. street improvements to enhance (Plan to be produced by end of 2002.) Detailed guidance on area-based the attractiveness of London’s schemes, based upon a plan-led town centres. approach, will follow with a view to developing a prioritised list of schemes. Town Centre funding of £5m has been provided via BSP programmes in 2003/04. £16.8m has been allocated in 2004/05 for local town centre improvements, streets for people and interchange improvements.

This also relates to the Mayor’s 100 Public Spaces Initiative. (See Guidance 6.2.8) 4G.Pr12 III Proposal 4G.Pr12: The Strategy adopts a target for The introduction of the central Boroughs must include their local 2011 of absolute reductions in weekday traffic of 15 London Congestion Charging Scheme traffic growth forecasts and set out percent in Central London, zero growth across the rest (CCS) in February 2003 has resulted in how they expect their policies to of inner London, and reducing growth in outer London the 15 percent target for traffic contribute to meeting the traffic by a third, with the aim of achieving zero growth or reduction being achieved in this area reduction targets in Proposal 4G.Pr12. absolute reductions in outer London town centres. during the first year of its operation. This will provide a context for the London boroughs’ Boroughs must also set out schemes road traffic reduction responsibilities. The London It is noted that the Thames Gateway and activities to reduce traffic growth. boroughs will be expected to play a key role in is a priority growth area for the achieving or exceeding these targets through road Government and London Plan: Appropriate boroughs must not adopt traffic reduction initiatives introduced at local level. policies nor implement This target will be kept under review in the light of Table 4.1a of the LIPs guidance sets projects that compromise the monitoring evidence. out sub-regional traffic volume traffic reduction benefits achieved growth analysis. by the Central London CCS. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 83 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Pr14 III Proposal 4G.Pr14: Supporting measures to the By March 2004, 219 complementary Relevant boroughs must set out their proposed CCS, as outlined in annex 5 (of the MTS) - traffic management schemes had plan to implement existing agreed the congestion charging scheme for central London, been authorised at a cost of £32m, schemes. If the central London will be introduced by TfL and the boroughs. across 27 of the London boroughs - Congestion Charging Zone is the majority of the expenditure in the extended further guidance will be eight boroughs within or partly-within issued if appropriate. the charging zone. Eight types of scheme have been authorised - the majority are new or expansions of existing Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) and environmental traffic management schemes. Work is now complete in all boroughs who have received complementary measures funding.

TfL is currently consulting, on behalf of the Mayor, upon a revision to the Mayor’s Transport Strategy covering a westward extension to the central London CCS. If, following analysis of the representations and objections arising from the consultation, the Mayor decides to publish the revised Transport Strategy, if necessary it will be followed by additional, specific supplementary LIPs guidance. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 84 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Po5 Policy 4G.Po5: The creation of new or extended BSP allocations of £900k in 2004/05. Boroughs are encouraged to include Controlled Parking Zones will be supported, Other allocations made are as part of in their Parking and Enforcement particularly in inner London, outer London town the Central London CCS Plans a programme for identification, centres, and around Underground and rail stations Complementary measures. review and implementation of where parking pressures and conflicts are acute. potential new CPZs, including funding assumptions.

Boroughs are encouraged to refer to ‘Parking and Enforcement Guidance for Local Authorities’ contained in Appendix E of LIP Guidance. It is noted that the introduction of CPZs is subject to public consutation.

4G.Pr15 IV Proposal 4G.Pr15: TfL and the boroughs will review All TLRN roads are now operating Boroughs must include in their parking and loading controls along all the TLRN, as Red Routes (completed by end Parking and Enforcement Plans a including all side roads adjoining the TLRN, including of 00/01). programme for reviewing and all roads designated as GLA side roads, along busy bus A consultant is reviewing the implementing parking and loading routes and in other key locations. The GLA will seek to consistency between Red Routes, controls on ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus ensure that appropriate lengths of the roads in the GLA side roads and Special Parking Routes. immediate vicinity of the TLRN are designated as GLA Areas (SPAs). Revised order for A1 & side roads. The review will build on previous work by A503 has been made – other areas Boroughs must demonstrate how the Traffic Director for London, TfL and the London to be reviewed, but very few they have taken into account the boroughs. The aim will be to ensure that parking and amendments are expected hence needs of disabled motorists and the loading controls protect buses and traffic whilst works are expected to be completed servicing and delivery needs of ensuring necessary access for local shops, community by 2004. They will also identify businesses. facilities and residents, particularly for disabled people. locations where existing controls (To achieve this, all the TLRN and roads designated as need to be revised due to hazard/risk Refer to ‘Parking and Enforcement GLA side roads should have appropriate parking and created for other vehicles. Guidance for Local Authorities’ loading controls, with clear allocations of street space contained in Appendix E of this and explicit standards of enforcement by the end of Reviews of restrictions should be Guidance. 2001. These standards should be extended to cover completed by 2008. all roads with busy bus routes by end of 2008.) MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 85 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans The approach to reviewing parking and loading restrictions on ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes must be similar to that taken on the TLRN and help to facilitate the development of an approach as set out by MTS proposal 4G.Pr18.

4G.Po6 Policy 4G.Po6: The London boroughs should use their London Plan was published February Boroughs are encouraged to planning powers to limit the amount of parking 2004. demonstrate how they are using provided through public off-street car parks (including their planning policies to achieve this temporary car parks), in line with the objectives of the objective. (See also 4G.Pr16). Transport Strategy. Boroughs must have regard to the Policy Standards (Annex 4 of the London Plan) in developing parking polices for their UDPs and in exercising their development control functions. 4G.Pr16 IV Proposal 4G.Pr16: The London boroughs should review Monitoring of off-street tariffs began Boroughs must set out a summary the provision and pricing of public off-street parking to in December 2002, principally via list of all off-street public car parks ensure that this conforms with the objectives of the website searches. in town centres, together with the Transport Strategy. The London boroughs should borough’s charging policy. The ensure that charges for off-street car parking in town The review referred to will be off- street parking list must identify centres give priority to short term users. (Annual requested as part of annual Borough parking facilities for disabled monitoring of public off-street parking to commence Parking Plans, advice on the content customers. in 2002.) of which is included in TfL's Parking and Enforcement Guidance for Local Boroughs must include a Parking and Authorities which is included in Enforcement plan in accordance with Appendix E of this Guidance. MTS requirements and ‘Parking and Enforcement Guidance for Local Authorities’ in Appendix E of this Guidance. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 86 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans

4G.Pr17 IV Proposal 4G.Pr17: Boroughs should submit Parking and TfL’s Parking and Enforcement Boroughs must include Parking and Enforcement Plans as an integral part of future Local Guidance for Local Authorities is Enforcement Plans as an integral part Implementation Plan. The London boroughs’ Parking included in Appendix E of this of LIPs. and Enforcement Plans must fully reflect the Guidance. objectives of the Transport Strategy and, in particular: Refer to ‘Parking and Enforcement be comprehensive, including consideration of parking Guidance for Local Authorities’ - provision, charging regimes, on-street controls and Appendix E of this Guidance. parking standards; be co-ordinated and compatible with surrounding authorities; provide a clear strategy for effective enforcement; support the economic viability of town centres, whilst reducing the overall availability of long-stay parking; ensure that the needs of disabled people, motorcycles, buses, coaches, business and freight are taken into account, along with loading and signing issues in relation to parking; demonstrate how the provision, location, safety and security of public car parks will deliver the objectives of the Strategy. (More detailed guidance on the content of Parking and Enforcement Plans will be issued as part of LIP guidance). 4G.Pr18 III Proposal 4G.Pr18: The approach adopted on red The whole of the TLRN has now been Boroughs must include a plan, routes set out in paragraphs 4G.102 - 4G.104 (including converted to Red Route controls. including a timetable, for environmental improvements) should be applied to the implementing parallel initiatives on whole of the TLRN and roads designated as GLA side The Traffic Management Bill 2003 is all ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes (as roads before the end of 2004;. Parallel initiatives before Parliament in 2004. Assuming shown on the map in Appendix D) should be applied by the London boroughs to all other the enactment of the Bill, boroughs under their control. ‘A' Roads and busy bus routes starting in 2003. (This should take account of its provisions Parallel initiatives must include the complements Proposal 4G.Pr15.) in preparing their plans. following elements: - Identification of sections of the ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus routes network to review with TfL by July 2005 MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 87 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans - Determination of the principal functions of the section of network in terms of the importance of the different road users based on the MTS with TfL by July 2005 -Assessment of the problems experienced on the section of network by road users taking account of the priorities for main roads identified above by December 2006 - Design and development of schemes to address the problems identified above by March 2011. 4G.Pr19 III Proposal 4G.Pr19: TfL will take forward the setting up The London Traffic Control Centre Boroughs must set out specific of a London Traffic Control Centre, bringing together (LTCC) has been operating since 18 proposals to support the provision traffic management and control functions. (London November 2002 and became fully of information to LTCC. Traffic Control Centre to be complete by March 2004.) operational on 6 January 2003 when the MPS joined. A second Congestion Intervention Team has been deployed by the MPS, and LTCC is fully engaged in their deployment. The LTCC is staffed 24 hours, 7 days a week and works closely with London Buses ‘Centre Comm Control Centre’ and the Transport Operational Command Unit.

The new Directorate of Traffic Management (DTM) was set up in June 2003, a new Director of Road Network Operations was appointed in November 2003 and a new LTCC MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 88 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans Operations Management joined in October 2003. TfL are developing a new data management ‘dashboard’ and London Traffic Information System (LTIS) summary. 4G.Pr20 III Proposal 4G.Pr20: TfL will identify the major Bottlenecks for buses have been Boroughs must include a programme congestion bottlenecks on the TLRN and develop a reviewed as part of LBI 1. for a review of the worst congestion programme of options for consideration. The London A traffic analysis unit has been set up bottlenecks and an implementation boroughs should identify the worst congestion to improve a centralised, prioritised, programme for addressing these. bottlenecks on those parts of the road network that ‘Endemic Pinch Point’ List. Trend fall under their control in their LIP. (The congestion Analysis has been undertaken by TfL bottlenecks should be identified by the end of 2002.) to identify the location of pinch points that: 1) need engineering review work 2) need on-street support 3) need signals to be reviewed This has produced a top-20 list which TfL are in the process of validating with stakeholders. 4G.Pr22 Proposal: 4G.Pr22: TfL will work with London boroughs Two meetings were held with borough Boroughs are encouraged to set out a to produce guidance before the end of 2003 on representatives and LTUC during programme for addressing current secondary and local signing and street name signing; 2003, and a draft Action Plan for deficiencies in secondary and local followed by an investment programme to implement delivering guidance and an investment signing and street name signing. new signing initiatives as resources permit. (Costs and programme was agreed. Currently appropriate timescale will be identified in preparing awaiting TfL approval to consult the investment programme.) formally on the Plan.

The guidance and proposed London-wide investment programme are planned to be complete by August 2004. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 89 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4G.Pr23 Proposal 4G.Pr23: TfL will establish a streetworks A Streetworks taskforce was Boroughs are encouraged to set out taskforce to ensure the effective co-ordination and established in December 2001. any relevant plans and activities. advance planning of all streetworks on the TLRN. A pilot lane rental system has been (Streetworks task force to be established by end operating in Camden since April 2002, of 2001.) with the inclusion of TLRN roads in Camden since 2 September 2002.

The Street Faults Contact Centre became operational on 10 February 2003. This is a 25-seat contact centre aimed at reporting faults on the TLRN and passing on other faults to the relevant highway authority. System has been online and accessible from website since 17 February 2003.

TfL have developed a new ‘LondonWorks’ management system incorporating Liveworks, previously MISS (being used in 12 London boroughs), and ClearView (software to coordinate planned works). The new integrated IT system will collate and distribute information and functionality, to a wide variety of audiences, for the planning and co-ordination of roadworks, streetworks and other traffic disrupting events in London. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 90 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans

4G.Pr24 III Proposal 4G.Pr24: The Mayor will press the S74A (of NRSWA) lane rental was Boroughs must set out their Government to bring forward legislation that will introduced on TLRN in October 2002. proposals to meet their statutory increase the powers available to highway authorities Pilot Streetworks lane rental system duties and how they propose to to control streetworks. Subject to the necessary operating in Camden from 2 develop mechanisms for coordination legislation, TfL will investigate the introduction of a September 2002. Current discussions of road and streetworks. pilot ‘street space rental’ system for works undertaken between TfL and DfT to introduce on or inside the Inner Ring Road, whereby there is a primary legislation to seek increased financial incentive to complete streetworks quickly powers for TfL via the new Traffic and with minimum disruption. This pilot could be Management Bill to keep London’s extended to other parts of London if it proved main roads clear (possible expansion successful. of lane rental in London and/or a permit system).

4G.Pr25 VIII Proposal 4G.Pr25: As the first stage in a new approach Annual conditions surveys of TLRN Boroughs must include programmes to street maintenance, Transport for London and the and BPRN footway, carriageways are for preparing five year asset London boroughs will each produce a three-year used to plan expenditure to remove management plans. priority street maintenance plan to cover bridges and the backlog of under investment. principal carriageways reflecting the objectives of the Transport Strategy and available resources. (First plans TfL/LOTAG have a London wide to be produced by April 2002.) prioritisation system for strengthening of structures that do not meet current load bearing obligations. In order to establish information about the state of repair of structures on the BPRN, TfL has funded condition surveys in line with the standard being developed nationally. Similarly, funding has been provided to collect condition data for street lighting and other electrical equipment and traffic signs on BPRN. MTS - Streets LIP Guidance 2004 | 91 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans £42.7m was allocated to improve the condition of main roads and strengthen bridges in 2003/04 via the BSP programme, and £52.3m has been allocated for 2004/05.

4G.Pr26 VIII Proposal 4G.Pr26: TfL will work with the London See 4G.Pr25. Boroughs must refer to the Street boroughs to develop a long term approach to the Maintenance Strategy (published by funding and management of all aspects of street In addition, studies commenced to TfL in June 2003) and Street maintenance throughout London. (Long term approach identify further works to upgrade and Maintenance Plans in preparing to be developed by 2003.) maintain London Cycle Network and their LIP. routes to an acceptable standard for cycling. Boroughs are encouraged to include a statement of their policy regarding hours of operation of roadworks.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - Car user LIP Guidance 2004 | 92 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4H.Pr1 Proposal 4H.Pr1: TfL, working with the boroughs and Two information sources regarding Boroughs are encouraged to the Government, will review options for extending London traffic conditions can be fund implement schemes to provide real-time information on traffic problems, availability on the TfL website. These are: real-time information on traffic of parking and public transport options, including a a) ‘Capital Cams’ which provide conditions and parking and to review of options for managing diversion to real-time visual information at complement TfL's initiatives in appropriate alternative routes. (Review to be 45 sites in London, and this area. completed by March 2000.) b) London Traffic Information Systems (LTIS) which give information on road-based incidents and on-going events. 4H.Pr2 IV Proposal 4H.Pr2: TfL, working with Network Rail and A park-and-ride framework to assess Boroughs must include an indication train operating companies, in consultation with local impact of park-and-ride proposals of any sites the borough considers authorities and Regional Assemblies, will review was developed in autumn 2003. suitable for park-and-ride, or any current provision of car parking at Underground and plans the borough has to conduct a London Underground Limited (LUL) National Rail stations, bringing forward plans to review of potential sites in line with has implemented plans to upgrade upgrade and extend provision where this will result in the criteria in 4H.Pr2. (This is and extend provision of car parking shortening of car journeys and an overall reduction in particularly relevant for outer London through: car use within and beyond London. A high priority will boroughs.) - Operation Hawkeye which will be given to accessible parking for disabled motorists. provide CCTV at every LUL car park (Review to be completed by the end of 2002.) Boroughs are encouraged to identify -New car park contracts to deliver appropriate proposals for other car a range of improvements (increased parking at stations. signage, cleaning, enforcement etc.) - Direct investment in major resurfacing and drainage works at four sites LUL are also looking at extending provision at a number of sites. In addition LUL has given a high priority to accessible parking for disabled commuters. Twice the provision is given at step-free stations. MTS - Car user LIP Guidance 2004 | 93 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4H.Pr3 III Proposal 4H.Pr3: The London boroughs and businesses Car Share: A sub regional trial of a Boroughs with such schemes and will be encouraged to support the development and web-based car share scheme in North clubs must set out their programme introduction of car sharing schemes and city car clubs. London was launched in May 2002. for the further establishment and This ran for two years. development of car share and car Car Clubs: Seven London boroughs club schemes, where justified by have funding for development costs local conditions. Other boroughs are for two years to develop car clubs. encouraged to set out their plans for Smart Moves will operate the scheme, such schemes and clubs. including City Car Club Kensington and Chelsea (launched 17 September 2003).

New parking bays for City Car Club in Acton (Ealing) launched on 17 September 2003.

MOSES, an EU project, focused on car clubs in new developments, in Sutton and Southwark. This has led to a draft SPG. Londonliftshare.com launched during European mobility week on 16 September 2003 - an extension of liftshare.com which sees nearly 40,000 people a month using the service nationwide. A North London Transport /liftshare conference took place on 19 September 2003 to launch car sharing to local businesses. The early success of the pilot has resulted in five other sub-regional partnerships being - Highlighting denotes a priority area allocated funding to set up similar Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS systems from 2003/04. Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) MTS - Walking LIP Guidance 2004 | 94 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4I.Pr2 VI Proposal 4I.Pr2: TfL will work with the boroughs and BSP funding is allocated to boroughs Boroughs must include programmes other relevant organisations to ensure the effective to improve conditions for walking and and plans for infrastructure promotion and delivery of better conditions for other local trips to shops, schools improvements and promotional pedestrians. and offices through specific walking activities to deliver better conditions measures and area-wide schemes in for pedestrians. town centres and residential areas. Boroughs must also include In 2004/5, £3.2m was allocated to proposals for improving personal boroughs for walking schemes with an safety and security, especially for additional £16.8 m for area based women and vulnerable groups, schemes and £6.5m allocated for particularly at night. Safer Routes to Schools (for which pedestrians will be major beneficiaries).

4I.Pr3 VI Proposal 4I.Pr3: TfL will work with the London The Walking Plan for London was Boroughs must include information boroughs, other public bodies, private sector and published in February 2004. on how they will contribute towards voluntary groups with an expertise in walking issues the effective implementation of the and produce a Walking Plan for London which will Walking Plan. provide a framework for implementation and monitoring of the Transport Strategy. (Walking Plan for London will be developed by the end of 2002.)

4I.Pr4 VI Proposal 4I.Pr4: TfL will progress the World Squares Trafalgar Square Scheme completed The City of Westminster must set out For All Project, with the partial pedestrianisation of June 2003. how scheme management will be Trafalgar Square as the first stage. TfL will work in continued in Trafalgar Square and partnership with the London boroughs and the Police Parliament Square is in the TfL developed, when appropriate, for to ensure that these and other pedestrianised areas Business Plan for 2005/06 and Parliament Square. are effectively managed. (The first stage of 2006/07. Boroughs must describe the pedestrianisation of Trafalgar Square, outside the management principles relating to the National Gallery, should be completed by the middle operation of other pedestrianised area of 2003.) projects that are being developed, where appropriate. MTS - Walking LIP Guidance 2004 | 95 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4I.Pr6 VI Proposal 4I.Pr6: TfL, working with the boroughs and A BSP submission, (received from Boroughs must include programmes other relevant organisations, will support the the Corporation of London) was and schemes to improve existing completion and promotion of the six strategic walking awarded £644k to begin work on the strategic routes. Broughs must routes. These are the London Outer Orbital Path, completion and enhancement of protect these routes through their the Capital Ring, the Thames Path National Trail, strategic walking routes in 2003/04. planning documents. Local the Jubilee Walkway, the South-East Green Chain The initial funding has been used to promotion of routes must consider and the Lee Valley Walk. support a range of initiatives in the communication requirements 2003/04 incorporating physical works, of local residents. signing and promotion. The Jubilee Walkway was completed end 2003 and substantial improvements have been made to other routes. The Corporation of London have established a Steering Group to oversee and co-ordinate the work. In 2004/5, £488k has been awarded through the BSP process to continue implementation/ enhancement of the routes. 4I.Pr7 VI Proposal 4I.Pr7: TfL and the London boroughs will be To date, in excess of 20 sites on the Boroughs must set out the priorities required to review all traffic signal junctions and TLRN have been reviewed annually via and programme(s) for the implement pedestrian phases wherever practicable, signal modernisation, safety and investigation and introduction of taking account of the impact on priority traffic, such walking programmes. pedestrian phases. as buses. (Twenty sites on TLRN to be investigated By March 2004 a total of 88 new each year, with further sites investigated on London signalled pedestrian crossings and 33 Mitigation measures to minimise borough roads.) new or relocated Toucans had been significant adverse impacts on buses installed. These programmes will must also be taken into account. continue. The programme must take account of any impacts on all the targets in In addition, £7.8m has been allocated Table 4-1. for local traffic signals via the BSP programme for 2004/05. MTS - Walking LIP Guidance 2004 | 96 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4I.Pr8 VI Proposal 4I.Pr8: Programmes of improvements will be The Asset Inventory Management Boroughs must set out their developed by TfL and the London boroughs to make System (AIMS - see Proposal 4G.Pr25) programmes of footway the street environment more accessible, removing included a survey of footway conditions improvements, including access barriers and obstructions that make it difficult or on TLRN and borough principal roads. improvements and accessibility unsafe for pedestrians to use the street. (Programme improvements to bus stops. A maintenance strategy has been to be developed by the end of 2002.) developed to model the costs/ Boroughs must consult on local expenditure for improving the condition pedestrian priorities when preparing of footways (and carriageways) over programme of access improvements. time, based on condition surveys carried out annually. Each condition survey will enable the model to be further refined, as well as directing available funding to the areas where footway condition is to be improved. A £2.7m programme of accessibility works on the TLRN is to be completed in 2003/04, including the provision of dropped kerbs, tactile paving, audible signals and at-grade crossings and ramps. A further £2.7m programme has been agreed for 2004/05. A £3.2m budget was allocated to boroughs in 2003/04 for works at bus stops to ensure that passengers are provided with appropriate facilities that can be effectively served by low floors buses thus improving accessibility for all. £3m has been allocated for 2004/05 via the BSP programme and local area accessibility budget of over £1m. MTS - Cycling LIP Guidance 2004 | 97 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4J.Po1 Policy 4J.Po1: TfL and the London boroughs, in The London Cycling Action Plan was Boroughs are encouraged to set out consultation with cyclist user groups, will undertake published in February 2004 following how they consult with cyclist user and support measures to make the cycling consultation. This sets programmes groups and undertake and support environment safer and more convenient for users. for improving the cycling environment measures to make the cycling by introducing a network of routes environment safer and more (LCN+), remedial safety and increased convenient. access and priority, cycle parking facilities on street, at schools and stations and routes through parks and green corridors. A Stakeholder Conference took place in June 2004 and monitoring and review group has been established to track progress.

4J.Pr1 VII Proposal 4J.Pr1: TfL will establish a Cycling Centre The CCE was set up in 2001. The Boroughs must include details of of Excellence that will prepare a plan to guide the London Cycle Action Plan was local borough action to support development of cycling initiatives in consultation with published in February 2004. London Cycling Action Plan the boroughs and cyclist user groups. (Plan to be objectives. completed by 2002.)

4J.Pr3 VII Proposal 4J.Pr3: The Cycling Centre of Excellence A high demand network of 900km Relevant boroughs must set out (CCE) will co-ordinate the LCN in partnership with a (LCN+) has been agreed and a implementation programmes for lead London borough. A project management model successful management and the LCN. similar to the London Bus Initiative will be followed, co-ordination process established with increased support to the boroughs to ensure between CCE, and the London delivery. (Priority higher demand routes will be Borough of Camden, and individual completed by the end of 2004, and the remaining highway authorities. A new process network will be completed by 2008 to a consistent combining consultation and feasibility high standard.) (CRISP) has been developed to inform decision-making on network schemes and final design standards and planning, consultation and performance methodologies will be published by the end of 2004 in the LCN+ Network Plan. MTS - Cycling LIP Guidance 2004 | 98 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4J.Pr4 VII Proposal 4J.Pr4: TfL will work with the London The review of investment was Relevant boroughs must set out in boroughs and cyclist user groups to develop extended produced in February 2002. This their implementation programmes high quality cycle routes, which will largely be based on highlighted the need to focus for LCN+. the LCN. By early 2002 a pilot high quality route will investment on LCN. be identified. The London-wide network will be LB Camden is the lead London identified by the end of 2002, with the aim of borough. Bids for the high quality cycle completing the extended high quality cycle routes routes are submitted through the BSP. within 10 years. The LCN+ has received an allocation of £7.1m for 2003/04 £6m for 2002/03 and £6.2m for 2004/05.

The LCN+ Network Plan was issued in May 2003 and provides for whole life project management of the programme and individual schemes. The bid for 2004/05 was developed August 2003 and the completion is forecast to be in 2009.

Work has commenced to look at shared cycle and pedestrian use of parks, riverside canals and former railway lands (termed Green Corridors). In 2002/03 TfL supported feasibility studies and improvements for Regents and Grand Union canalside and Chelsea railway bridge.

Plans to map designated cycle routes and advisory routes for purposes of planning, maintenance, promotion etc are underway. MTS - Cycling LIP Guidance 2004 | 99 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4J.Pr5 VII Proposal 4J.Pr5: TfL and the London boroughs will On the TLRN problematic movements Boroughs must include a programme look at the problems that cyclists encounter, for cyclists and hazardous locations for review of key cyclist accident particularly key accident locations, to see if these can have been identified for investigation. locations and a programme for the be solved by specific junction treatment or other implementation of traffic traffic management solutions. Advance stop lines are now included management solutions. at all signal sites where works are being undertaken irrespective of the On ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes primary objective of the scheme. (see Map in Appendix D) this must be incorporated into the ‘parallel A review of A23 and A202 has been initiatives’ as set out by 4G.Pr18. undertaken to pilot a package of measures to give increased priority for cyclists and to reduce conflict with turning traffic. The review of impacts was completed in December 2003 and implementation will be completed in August 2004. 4J.Pr6 VII Proposal 4J.Pr6: All new major highway and transport All TLRN schemes have been safety Boroughs must include details of infrastructure and traffic management schemes should audited for cycles. Cycle audit their cycle audit procedures. be cycle audited, and TfL and all boroughs should have procedures have been trialled on major cycle audit procedures and include cycling in safety schemes at Coulsdon and Vauxhall audit procedures. (Cycle audit procedures to be in Cross. The lessons from these have place by the end of 2001.) been incorporated into checklists of cyclists’ needs within bus and other non-cycling schemes.

Design standards for use within cycling schemes are currently out to consultation. A checklist of factors for traffic calming, roundabouts, junction, shared use, maintenance, widths and footway use will be incorporated within the London Cycle Design Standards. MTS - Cycling LIP Guidance 2004 | 100 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans The English Regions Cycling Development Team is undertaking a review of cycle audits and review and safety audits. The CCE will update the London Cycle Design Standards to reflect developments and publish a final version in 2004. 4J.Pr7 VII Proposal 4J.Pr7: TfL and the boroughs, working in A checklist for assessing planning Boroughs must include details of partnership with rail operators, businesses and applications has been available since programme proposals for additional educational establishments, will provide additional May 2001. Revisions to the checklist cycle access and secure cycle parking secure cycle parking facilities, including at shopping on parking for visitors and residential facilities. centres and transport interchanges. The Mayor will developments were made in also encourage the provision of these and other Spring 2004. facilities required by cyclists at workplaces and places of education, and will expect the boroughs to require A database of on-street and other developers, wherever practicable, to: provide good open access cycle parking is being cycle access to the development; install secure compiled for 15 boroughs. cycle parking; provide showers and lockers and changing facilities. Development of a comprehensive database is under consideration with boroughs at present.

Information for the area within the Congestion Charging zone has been mapped and published.

TfL fund on-street cycle parking through the BSP process.

School Cycling Parking Programme: the Mayor’s School Cycle Parking Programme will provide free cycle MTS - Cycling LIP Guidance 2004 | 101 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans parking for schools through a £300k scheme 2003/04 and £700k 2004/05. The first tranche of 46 schools to receive the modern cycle parking facilities was announced by the Mayor and 2003 for implementation was completed in Spring 2004.

A site for a bike station at Waterloo was agreed with SWT/ Railtrack July 2002.

Congestion Charging related pilot schemes including access and facilities at Waterloo, the City, Wimbledon and Surbiton, but have experienced delays due to the complexity of stakeholders interests.

Successful pilot schemes in Ealing for high quality residents parking have been delivered.

A pilot with LUL re coordination with Infracos is underway at Canada Water Station.

Pilot new-build secure parking facilities will be operational at Walthamstow and Westminster in 2004 and Finsbury Park early 2005. MTS - Cycling LIP Guidance 2004 | 102 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4J.Pr8 VII Proposal 4J.Pr8: TfL will work with the London TfL are supporting boroughs through Boroughs must include details of boroughs and the police to support effective training the BSP process - 18 boroughs programmes for the implementation for children and adults for safer cycling. TfL will work allocated £394.5m 2003/04 for a of these measures. with the London boroughs, the voluntary and range of innovative cycle training pilot community sectors to increase awareness of the schemes. Training in 10 locations was problems caused by cycling on the footway and other held during Bike Week in June 2003. offences, and will develop effective measures for addressing them. Working with London boroughs, road safety specialists, police and the National Cycling Strategy the CCE has established a London-wide accreditation system and standards for cycle training of children, teenagers, adults, professionals. Together this provides the basis for an enhanced programme to equip Londoners to cycle in an urban environment, which will be fully operational in every borough by 2005/06.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 103

MTS - Freight LIP Guidance 2004 | 103 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4K.Pr1 Proposal 4K.Pr1: TfL will set up a London Sustainable The London Sustainable Distribution Boroughs are encouraged to include Distribution Partnership that will assist in the Partnership was set up at the end of a commitment to work with TfL to development and implementation of proposals for 2001. The first meeting took place in achieve the aims of the LSDP and effective distribution of goods in London. (The London February 2002 with membership help further specific initiatives Sustainable Distribution Partnership is to be from a cross-section of TfL and identified by the LSDP, for example established by the end of 2001.) stakeholders. facilitating trials and providing information from surveys. The LSDP has identified a range of freight objectives that it is working to realise Initiatives being progressed by the LSDP include the Delivery Curfew Initiative, Priority Lanes for HGVs and buses, improved servicing and loading provision, improved information, technology for freight and secure freight vehicle parking. 4K.Pr2 Proposal 4K.Pr2: TfL will encourage the early All sub-regions are discussing the Boroughs are encouraged to set out development of Freight Quality Partnerships (FQPs), setting up of FQPs, except Central the strategies and schemes to be particularly at the sub-regional level, to complement London. adopted to achieve the LSDP freight similar, borough-led initiatives at the more local scale. related objectives including (The initial partnerships should be set up early 2002.) North London set up the Brimsdown participating in sub-regional (industrial /retail park) FQP in 2002 partnerships as appropriate and and is developing an action implementation of activities and programme. schemes (see 4K.Pr1).

West London FQP was launched in Boroughs are encouraged to identify April 2003 and has been carrying out freight forum representatives and a freight surveys at Heathrow and freight contacts map covering freight conducted a delivery and access related activities including waste study in Ealing Town centre. planning, development planning, fleet vehicle manager (goods vehicles), environmental health officer (delivery noise abatement). Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 104

MTS - Freight LIP Guidance 2004 | 104 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans SELTRANS and Thames Gateway subregions are concentrating on town centre problems and promoting clean transport delivery pilot trials.

All sub-regions have been allocated funds in 2003/04 through the BSP and are developing work programmes – bids have been received for 2004/05.

TfL are establishing a borough/ partnership freight forum to assist in the dissemination of best practice. The forum will be represented at the LSDP. The setting up of FQPs will be helped by a DfT guide based on the experience with FQPs outside London. 4K.Pr3 III Proposal 4K.Pr3: The London boroughs and TfL should A consultant was appointed in Boroughs must include a review the London Lorry Ban's exempt network and October 2002 and Stage One commitment to engage with the access routes to it. They should also consider the (examination of the exempt network) LLCS consultation process, a wider strategic context of the Ban. reported in autumn 2003. commitment to seek ways to work with the ALG to modernise, where Stage two considers the operational appropriate, the requirements of issues of the London Lorry Control the LLCS in respect of vehicle System (LLCS). specifications, routing requirements and driver training, or equivalent Consultation is due for completion measures in response to the in 2004/05 with implementation in proposal. 2004/5 and 2005/06. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 105

MTS - Freight LIP Guidance 2004 | 105 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4K.Pr4 Proposal 4K.Pr4: The Mayor’s Transport, Air Quality Work is on going with the London Boroughs must set out how they and Noise Strategies should form the basis of Sustainable Development are progressing LEZ proposals, in partnerships with business and major fleet operators Partnership (LSDP) and also with the particular their committment to the and the London boroughs and sub-regional environmental strategy lead officers London-wide scheme. partnerships to: encourage the accelerated take-up in the GLA to maximise these of cleaner and quieter vehicle technologies, the benefits. Boroughs must identify potential achievement of quieter freight and distribution and facilities for alternative cleaner fuels waste operations and practices, to the promotion A Low Emission Zone (LEZ) Study and the strategy to be followed in of better vehicle maintenance and considerate and was undertaken to investigate the their increased provision and use. economical driving. feasibility of one or more LEZs in Boroughs must identify how the London (joint study between GLA, uptake of cleaner fueled vehicles is TfL, government, the Boroughs and to be encouraged and improved the ALG). vehicle maintenance standards supported Boroughs must identify a strategy for uptake of cleaner fueled vehicles within the borough’s own transport fleet and the freight fleets of contracted services.

Boroughs must also identify measures to encourage waste transport by rail, river and canal where appropriate (whilst promoting safe use of the River Thames), and taking account of environmental impacts. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 106

MTS - Freight LIP Guidance 2004 | 106 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4K.Pr5 Proposal 4K.Pr5: TfL will work with the SRA and the A London Rail Land Strategy Group Boroughs are encouraged to set out boroughs to ensure suitable sites and facilities are has been set up with representatives measures to protect potential new made available to enable the transfer of freight to rail, of TfL and SRA to identify sites and and existing rail freight transfer both through the development of existing sites and protect them from future locations. the provision of new ones. development. Sites in London will be covered by direction from the GLA (Supplementary Planning Guidance) – otherwise by local UDPs.

The SRA Regional Freight Strategy identifies a need for three or four large interchanges and also for urban freight terminals. These are likely to be located near the M25 where the main rail and road radials intersect. No specific sites have been identified in the SRA’s recent ‘Analysis of Rail Freight – London and the South East’ and no reference to the need for these in the new SRA Strategic Plan. The London Rail Freight Study, which reported in April 2003 made recommendations on this issue.

The Sub-regional Development Frameworks and Supplementary Planning Guidance on Land for Transport are under development will contain details of freight interchange locations to be - Highlighting denotes a priority area protected and developed. Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 107

MTS - International LIP Guidance 2004 | 107 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4L.Po6 Policy 4L.Po6: The Mayor wants to encourage the GLA were represented on Heathrow, Boroughs which are members of development of high levels of public transport access London City Airport and Biggin Hill the Airport Transport Forums are to London’s Airports, and encourage a shift from the Consolation Committees. encouraged to include a commitment private car in over to reduce congestion. TfL will work to work within these bodies to with the Airport Transport Forums to achieve a achieve a significant increase in the significant increase in the proportion of travel to proportion of travel to airports by Heathrow (and other airports) by public transport, to public transport, and to limit traffic limit traffic congestion particularly in west London congestion in the vicinity of the approaches to Heathrow. airport in conjunction with TfL.

Relevant boroughs are encouraged to include appropriate initiatives.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 108

MTS - Water LIP Guidance 2004 | 108 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4M.Pr2 Proposal 4M.Pr2: TfL will work with relevant partners The London Sustainable Development Relevant boroughs are encouraged to identify options for increasing freight use of the Partnership is considering water to set out any measures they are River Thames and other waterways. (Proposals to be based freight options. implementing on relevant issues e.g. made by the end of 2002.) safeguarding wharves and facilities, A Water Freight study has been access to river. undertaken by the PLA. A water freight study is planned with British Waterways in 2004/05.

Proposals for additional safeguarding of wharves will be published in summer 2004.

The Mayor’s Municipal Waste Management strategy was published in September 2003. Refer to Proposal 3.Pr6 (Paragraph 3).

4M.Po2 Policy 4M.Po2: The Mayor will support the retention See 4M.Pr2 as above. Relevant boroughs must take account of freight interchange facilities on the Thames and of decisions relating to safeguarding other waterways. of wharves in developing relevant plans and programmes.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 109

MTS - Taxis, Private Hire and community transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 109 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4N.Po2 Policy 4N.Po2: Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs) should be All operators are now licensed. Boroughs are encouraged to confirm safe, reliable and of good quality so they can play a Driver licensing started in 2003 and that when reviewing contracts which major role in London’s transport system including, in vehicle licensing in April 2004. entail the carrying of vulnerable due course, the provision of accessible transport However, the current regulations that passengers (e.g. schoolchildren, older services. determine the licensing regime do not people), they ensure that contracting extent to contract work. bodies take steps to ensure that drivers are checked at the Criminal TfL Equality and Inclusion has Records Bureau (CRB). encouraged the use of PHVs for subsidised door-to-door trips for Boroughs are encouraged to identify disabled people by funding the mechanisms for the ongoing Capital Call Scheme in five London monitoring of PHV operators and boroughs with a further five boroughs drivers used. joining in 2004. 4N.Pr1 Proposal 4N.Pr1: TfL, in consultation with the taxi Licensing of private hire operators Boroughs are encouraged to include and private hire trade and other interested parties, is began in January 2001. proposals in line with the PCO best carrying out an extensive review of taxis and PHVs and practice guidelines, to include: will bring forward proposals, with the aim of improving Private hire driver licensing started in -new provision, especially at key personal safety for passengers, improving the supply, April 2003 and have been enforceable sites of new and improved taxi and enhancing passengers’ travel experience. (Initial since 1 June 2003. ranks, for example at railways / bus findings of the review will be reported in summer PHV licensing started in Spring 2004. stations and in town centres, and 2001, with specific short term proposals, following Temporary driver permits were - dentification of key points of consultation with the trade. There will be a continuing introduced in December 2003. contact. review of policy and further proposals are expected to A contract for vehicle inspections be put forward in 2002.) has been signed. Boroughs are encouraged to promote the Mayor’s ‘Safer Travel at Night’ A working group has been set up to initiatives and include their own monitor and support the mobilisation proposals for improving safety and process in respect of vehicle testing. security including for women and vulnerable groups. - Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 110

MTS - Water LIP Guidance 2004 | 110 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans The comparable distance for taxi journeys was raised in November 2001 from six to 12 miles. An increase in taxi fares at the same time was also successful as an incentive for drivers to work evenings, nights and weekends. Further changes to the tariff structure became effective in April 2003 to simplify fares for passengers by consolidating into basic rates the extra charges for luggage and additional passengers. The taxi driver Knowledge of London assessment arrangements have been revised by introducing changes to the written test and updating and consolidating the Knowledge of London ‘Blue Book’ – the list of basic routes and other information applicants are required to learn as part of their pre-licensing training. The PCO used 2003 as the European Year of People with Disabilities to promote services by consulting with both the taxi and private hire trades on how best to approach raising driver awareness of equality and inclusion. Improvements to the ethnic monitoring of taxi driver applicants and licensed drivers will be used to consult with the trade on how best to promote the trade within the context of equal opportunity. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 111

MTS - Water LIP Guidance 2004 | 111 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4N.Pr5 V Proposal 4N.Pr5: TfL will work with the community Initial discussions with the Boroughs must include details of how transport sector and the London boroughs to seek Community Transport (CT) sector they will work with TfL and the CT closer integration of mainstream and community have taken place between TfL and sector to take forward these transport services, and take into account the outcome the Community Transport objectives. of the Commission for Accessible Transport pilot Association (CTA). The CTA is now schemes. (This will be on-going, but TfL will have initial undertaking a review of CT schemes Boroughs must demonstrate how discussions with the community transport sector by in London within the context of a consideration is given to Taxi and the end of 2001 to identify the way forward.) wider review of door-to-door other door-to-door services carrying services being carried out by TfL. out subsidised journeys for disabled The objective of the parallel reviews people in terms of the need for the will be to set an overall strategic vehicle to stop at an accessible point framework for door-to-door services for the passenger and for the driver (including fares, eligibility and service to offer assistance in entering and delivery mechanism) and to ensure exiting the vehicle. that the CT sector has a clear role in contributing to this framework. Boroughs must take account of the outcomes of the CAT pilots including TfL is currently funding CT schemes ensuring efficient and appropriate on a project basis (for example use of local CT schemes within a Capital Call scheme and scheduling coherent service delivery framework. software for PHV).

The Commission of Accessible Transport (CAT) pilot projects will be considered as a mechanism to integrate different door-to-door provision into a effective service delivery model.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 112

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 112 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4O.Po1 Policy 4O.Po1: The transport system should be made TfL has made progress in addressing Boroughs are encouraged to set out more accessible by removing the physical, attitudinal the historical inaccessibility of its measures they are taking to make and communication barriers that affect independent vehicles, infrastructure, information their transport system more mobility. Everyone should have safe, comfortable and and customer services in recent accessible and to identify benchmark convenient access to a range of services, facilities years. Accessibility continues to accessibility standards for measuring and jobs. Work to achieve this should be through be a priority with TfL’s 2003/04 outputs with performance targets for partnership with transport providers and other and 2004/05 Business Plan and with outcomes. organisations including those of older and disabled the transfer of London Underground Londoners. Limited (LUL) to TfL. TfL has inherited Boroughs are encouraged to a major new set of access issues identify strategy and mechanisms for within its infrastructure and vehicles. consulting with older and disabled people, including identifying local There are a number of projects which stakeholder groups. feature provisions that improve access to stations and interchanges Boroughs are encouraged to include and are ways of meeting the duties proposals to promote or introduce outlined within the Disability Shopmobility schemes and proposals Discrimination Act (DDA). to improve direction signing of The rapid increase in the accessibility accessible routes to assist mobility of the bus fleet is well reported, but impaired people, especially in town alongside this, the business plan centres and at tourist and other continues to deliver accessible bus attractions. stops, new and replacement shelters, road crossings with audible and tactile controls, improvements to bus stations and information in alternative formats. An important major initiative is the introduction of Disability Equality Training for all new bus drivers and controllers within the compulsory BTEC course. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 113

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 113 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans In 2003/4 TfL introduced a pilot Mobility Assessment Centre which assesses the mobility of disabled people to ascertain eligibility for membership of door-to-door services. TfL working with boroughs taking this forward in 2004.

A major strategic study into the future of door-to-door services has been started in partnership with the boroughs and the ALG, which will facilitate the delivery of services more effectively to members in the future.

The review was published in summer 2004. The review will also consider non-mobility barriers to use of public transport and ways of overcoming these barriers. The GLA and ALG are present on the steering group.

4O.Pr1 V Proposal 4O.Pr1: TfL and the boroughs will review the The Mayor (through TfL) has Boroughs must set out how they eligibility criteria for using door-to-door services, in committed money to boroughs to will deliver door-to-door transport conjunction with the other reviews of door-to-door support Taxicard schemes, subject services for disabled people. Refer services. The criteria should aim to include all people to minimum standards of schemes also to Proposal 4O.Pr3. who cannot use mainstream public transport because (subsidy levels etc.) including of a mobility difficulty. (It is expected that appropriate harmonisation of eligibility rules. criteria will be developed by the end of 2001/02.) A review of the eligibility criteria for Dial-a-Ride (DaR) has been produced. MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 114 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans DaR have introduced interim eligibility criteria in line with the harmonised Taxicard eligibility rules. New applicants for DaR must provide some proof of mobility problems and assessment may be introduced later. The eligibility criteria may be changed after completion of the review of these services. DaR has procured scheduling software to improve booking and scheduling efficiency. A strategic review of all door-to-door services will be published by TfL August 2004. The objective of the review is to ensure that door-to-door services in London effectively meet the understood need of mobility impaired people to travel. Entitlement to non-statutory door-to-door services should be determined via a consistent and transparent assessment process with oversight by disabled people. Door-to-door services should be delivered in an integrated manner making most effective use of local and Londonwide resources including Dial-a-Ride services and community transport services. Access to door-to-door services should be given through a flexible entitlement process which allows for eligible people to use these services in the most appropriate manner given individual transport requirements. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 115

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 115 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4O.Po2 Policy 4O.Po2: Availability of door-to-door services for See 40.Pr1 above. Boroughs are encouraged to set out vulnerable groups and people with mobility problems how they will implement door-to- should be improved with better co-ordination door transport services for disabled between existing providers and with fair eligibility and people (including the adoption of fair entitlement criteria, taking account of the outcome of standard all-London eligibility and the Commission for Accessible Transport Pilot entitlement criteria). Projects. 4O.Pr3 V Proposal 4O.Pr3: There should be a London-wide TfL provides funding for Taxicard Boroughs must set how they will Taxicard scheme provided by the London boroughs, initiatives. Schemes include: deliver door-to-door transport meeting minimum standards set by the Mayor. TfL will - Harmonising fares across London services for disabled people work with the boroughs to seek to get better equality - Harmonise trip limits – some ensuring a consistent minimum of Taxicard service across London in 2001/2 and boroughs allow more London-wide standard. Refer also beyond. In the longer term, if a method of eliminating -Removal of waiting lists. to Proposal 4O.Pr1. current inequalities across London cannot be agreed in -Standard automatic eligibility partnership with the London boroughs, the Mayor will criteria agreed require TfL to establish a London-wide scheme to -Standard user contribution achieve this. (It is important to deal with inequalities, -New publicity initiatives, e.g. and the Mayor and TfL are working with London door-to-door leaflet to be boroughs to resolve these, with the introduction of distributed across London in 2004 initial minimum standards in 2001/2.) - The introduction of Capital Call enhancement to Taxicard using PHV vehicles in boroughs where supply of licensed taxis is poor -A study looking at options for more focused and flexible entitlement for Taxicard e.g. ‘travel budgets’ -Roll out of mobility assessment processes in conjunction with assessing impacts of eligibility review. A mobility assessment pilot roject has been piloted in Newham and Westminster Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 116

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 116 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans -Work with contractor and PCO to improve Taxi supply -TfL will seek to ensure that the implications of the Commission of Accessible Transport Pilots are fully reflected in the renewed tender. Other changes following completion of eligibility review. 4O.Pr4 V Proposal 4O.Pr4: The supply of taxis and private hire The number of taxis available for Boroughs must indicate how their vehicles (when licensed) available for subsidised public Taxicard booking has been increasing, proposals for door-to-door transport transport should be increased, and a more even as a number of additional radio circuit will integrate licensed PHVs into distribution of services provided across London. companies have joined the original appropriate service delivery (The Mayor and TfL will work with the London contractor. The contract is to be mechanisms. boroughs, and with taxi and private hire companies, re-tendered in October 2004. to identify how more services can be provided, in the shortest practicable time.) Richmond and Kingston have parallel voucher schemes for minicabs. TfL funds the scheme in Kingston.

TfL has worked with Hackney Community Transport to develop the Capital Call scheme making use of PHVs in boroughs with poor licensed Taxi supply.

Capital Call was introduced in pilot boroughs of Enfield, Merton, Hounslow, Hillingdon Bexley, Kingston, Lewisham, Southwark and Lambeth. MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 117 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4O.Pr5 V Proposal 4O.Pr5: The lessons to be learned from the Four CAT pilot projects in London: Boroughs must set out how they will Commission for Accessible Transport’s door-to-door -Lewisham - Local Authority deliver door-to-door transport pilot projects will be taken forward by TfL and the vehicles work alongside DaR services taking account of CAT results London boroughs and applied across London. (The -Newham - combining DaR and as appropriate. pilot projects will be properly assessed in 2002/3. Taxicard. This Pilot was extended to The Mayor wants TfL to work with all the partners to October 2003 and the evaluation of identify improvements and apply them across London the extended pilot will be formally as soon as is practicable.) adopted by the Commission of Accessible Transport - Hackney - DaR and local community transport services linked -Havering - combined Taxicard and LA buses

A final report will be published of CAT pilots will be published in summer 2004.

The aim was to assess CAT pilot projects and to integrate the process with door-to-door strategic review to formulate a strategy for door-to-door transport across London.

The pilots in Newham will be extended with enhanced management and monitoring.

The lessons of the CAT pilot projects will be the basis of the service delivery recommendations of the Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 118

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 118 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans TfL door-to-door review and require that taking into account local circumstances, that door-to-door services are delivered in an integrated way including integrating use of PHVs licensed taxis, local authority minibuses and DaR through a demand centre approach. 4O.Pr6 V Proposal 4O.Pr6: A review will be carried out, by TfL This is part of the scope of the Boroughs must set out how they will and the London boroughs, to examine the cost to review discussed under 4O.Pr1. deliver door-to-door transport disabled people of using door-to-door services. services for disabled people taking (The Mayor wants the review to be carried out in account of CAT results as conjunction with the Pilot Projects with any outcomes appropriate. introduced soon after.) 4O.Pr9 V Proposal 4O.Pr9: Accessibility/ Mobility Forums will be London-wide – The London Mobility Boroughs must indicate how they will developed at the local and London-wide level, enabling Advisory Panel (LMAP) run by ALG, maintain, establish and facilitate local users to be involved in the process of developing became a joint TfL/ALG body from mobility consultation mechanisms London’s transport services and ensuring that people’s summer 2001 and local mobility ensuring that disabled people are needs are properly taken into account. (The London- forums have already been set up in fully represented and how such wide and initial local forums will be meeting before eight London boroughs. mechanisms will contribute to the end of 2001.) local policy development around TfL is working with boroughs accessible transport. and disability organisations. Boroughs must also indicate how local consultation processes can contribute to a London-wide strategic mobility forum. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 119

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 119 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4O.Pr12 V Proposal 4O.Pr12: The Mayor will press the Health The DfT has published a study that Boroughs must include details of Authorities, the London boroughs and other agencies highlights which wheelchairs and how they will assist the increased for increased provision of powered wheelchairs, mobility aids are appropriate for provision of powered wheelchairs mobility aids and services to aid the independent specific modes of transport. and other mobility aids. mobility of disabled people. (It is intended for discussions to start, and substantial progress to TfL is undertaking a review of be made, by the end of 2001.) door-to-door services and is considering the funding of a pilot project to assess the benefits of a wheelchair loan for door-to-door transport service users. 4O.Pr13 V Proposal 4O.Pr13: Disabled parking should be provided The London Plan requires all new Boroughs must include plans for in convenient locations, for existing and new developments to provide parking/ providing sufficient disabled parking developments, to enable easy access to activities and car-based access for disabled people at key locations. facilities. Existing facilities should be reviewed to (Annex 4, para 35 and 36). ensure there is sufficient disabled parking provided Supplementary Planning Guidance Boroughs must seek views of local at key locations. (The review is to be included in the Accessible London: Achieving an disabled motorists to determine London boroughs’ Parking and Enforcement Plans.) Inclusive Environment was published potential key locations. by the GLA April 2004.

TfL met with the ALG and several central London boroughs in November 2002 to discuss on-street parking provision (in the light of the GLA’s Access Denied report). The boroughs agreed to develop greater consistency in provision and this work is ongoing. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 120

MTS - Accessible transport LIP Guidance 2004 | 120 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4O.Pr14 V Proposal 4O.Pr14: TfL and the London boroughs will As a result of a TfL study into the Boroughs must set out a programme work with disability groups and the government to workings of the Blue Badge Scheme in which contributes to a robust and ensure the effective operation and enforcement of a Central London, the central London reputable Blue Badge scheme. reputable Blue Badge scheme and include a review of boroughs of Westminster, Kensington the central London disabled parking schemes. (The and Chelsea, Corporation of London review is to be completed be the end of 2002.) and Camden have agreed to harmonise the concessions offered to national Blue Badge holders visiting central London, and will provide a common minimum entitlement across the whole of central London.

In 2003/ 04 TfL introduced a pilot Mobility Assessment Centre. Refer to Policy 4O.Po1.

Subject to agreement with Boroughs it is intended to offer this service for all applicants to the Blue Badge scheme. TfL would like to work towards an agreed assessment and appeals processes and will be looking to pilot this for the Blue Badge scheme during 2004.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 121

MTS - Integration LIP Guidance 2004 | 121 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4P.Po2 Policy 4P.Po2: TfL will work with its partners to Refer to the TfL Interchange Plan. Boroughs are encouraged to include improve interchange between public transport modes, a commitment to work with TfL walking and cycling; make it easier for people to access and other partners to improve the public transport system via walking, cycling and interchange and access, where taxi; make interchanges accessible; and enable people appropriate by supporting TfL’s to access the public transport system by car where Interchange Plan and according to the this is essential, or meets broader strategic objectives. TfL Interchange Best Practice Guide and good practice accessibility guidelines (such as: Inclusive Mobility, SRA Code of Practice - Train and Station Services for Disabled Passengers, BS 8300 Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people – Code of practice (2001), Revised Part M of Building Regulations) including incorporation and improvement of facilities for taxis, cycling and walking and PHV and mobility impaired users.

Boroughs are encouraged to provide details of how they will improve direction signing for accessible routes to assist mobility impaired people, especially in town centres and at tourist and other attractions. 4P.Pr3 Proposal 4P.Pr3: TfL will work with others to develop Work has been ongoing to develop Boroughs are encouraged to include and implement a network-wide Travel Information Plan, customer information strategy, and proposals on how they will add to including standards of provision, by the end of 2002. an associated action plan. The action and improve TfL’s Journey Planner plan includes a range of initiatives facility e.g. specifying location of such as the ‘Journey Planner’ walking and cycling routes etc. promotion and marketing, SMS travel alerts and the combined Public Transport guides. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 122

MTS - Integration LIP Guidance 2004 | 122 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans The multi-modal journey planner became operational on TfL website in July 2002. It contains all public transport modes and walking and cycling. London Cycle Guides launched in May 2002 with over one million maps distributed. There is a recognised need for the development of electronic information sources which is currently being addressed. The journey planner showing real time information will be provided in a trial of on-street kiosks. Other media outlets will be extended as opportunities arise.

4P.Pr4 III Proposal 4P.Pr4: The London boroughs in conjunction In 2003/04 £2m BSP funding was Borough’s must set out programmes with TfL and key partners including business, health invested in green travel plans and to encourage the use of more authorities and educational establishments will develop travel awareness campaigns. TfL sustainable modes of transport and programmes to encourage individuals and organisations has given support to a number of set out how relevant promotional to adopt more sustainable modes of transport. These initiatives including: support for bike work, (e.g. travel plans, travel will include: week (June 2002); Health launch of awareness, demand management -Travel awareness campaigns: The London boroughs Guides (August 2002). Cycle 2002 etc.) is being progressed and how will develop programs to make people aware of the (September 2002). Development of these meet the communication benefits of sustainable travel. This could include work-based cycling within TfL travel requirements of local residents. information packs and presentations at schools, plan, Police, TOCU, and LAS cycling and participation in high profile events (such as car patrols; couriers and delivery services; free day) Pedicab safety and registration researched by Public Carriage Office. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 123

MTS - Integration LIP Guidance 2004 | 123 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans -Workplace travel plans: The London boroughs will A road safety campaign aimed at develop a programme to provide travel advice in lorries and cyclists, was recently partnership with TfL. Employers will be encouraged shown in cinemas. to establish travel plans, to inform employees of the options available, and address issues such as parking Future plans include campaigns to provision, location decisions, and lack of facilities increase driver awareness, compliance for cyclists. Such plans should be an integral part of of cyclist priority measures at development applications (see Policy3.Po7). junctions, and to widen the appeal - School Travel Plans: The London boroughs will work of cycling. Pedicabs – see 4N.Pr1. with schools to develop Plans that encourage more sustainable forms of Travel and reduce traffic TfL is exploring the concept of ‘Travel Instruction’ with the objective of congestion at schools. facilitating mobility impaired people - Exploring marketing and ticketing opportunities to to increase their transport choices encourage The use of public transport for visits to using accessible modes. It is major cultural and leisure events. envisaged that a holistic assessment - Campaigns to encourage responsible car use and process for mobility services could driving techniques. provide a basis for promoting such a service. 4P.Pr5 V Proposal 4P.Pr5: TfL will work with the London The Mayor’s safer travel at night Boroughs must set out their boroughs, the British Transport Police, the initiative has brought together key programme(s) to reduce transport Metropolitan Police, operators and trade unions to agencies. related crime and the fear of crime. bring forward and implement initiatives for reducing transport-related crime and fear of crime. Interfaces Personal security projects have been Boroughs also encouraged to will be managed to ensure consistent standards of developed at Transport interchanges promote the Mayor’s ‘Safer at Night’ safety are achieved. (Hounslow bus station, Wembley initiatives particularly in terms of Central, Clapham High St, Shadwell, personal safety in getting to and from Mitcham Junction, Seven Sisters, rail stations, bus stations and bus Lambeth North). stops.

The Transport Operational Command Boroughs must also state how this Unit (TOCU) was launched in June activity and its outcomes will be monitored. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 124

MTS - Integration LIP Guidance 2004 | 124 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 2002 and the rollout programme completed in March 2003. The TOCU now polices twenty key bus corridors with over 500 staff.

Safer travel at night initiative was launched in October 2002. A poster campaign highlighting the dangers of unlicensed minicabs was launched in October 2002, and a cinema com- mercial launched in December 2002.

The DLR has plans to implement a ‘last mile home’ project – whereby passengers will have access to a freephone linking them to their nearest cab office to complete their journey. This was trialled in 2003. In-bus CCTV, help points, Velocity system (system linking each railcar to the control room which includes CCTV) installed on the DLR by 2004.

Extra BTP policing on the Underground.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 125

MTS - Major projects LIP Guidance 2004 | 125 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans 4Q.Po1 Policy 4Q.Po1: Early progress should be made on Significant increases in bus capacity Boroughs are encouraged to set out proposals to increase significantly the capacity, and have been delivered. Several major local proposals to support increased extend the provision of, London’s public transport projects are being developed further. public transport capacity. system. The following groups of major projects should be taken forward: new cross-London rail links, the ‘Regional Metros’; improvements to London’s orbital rail network, including the northern and southern extensions of the East London Line and the increased capacity of the West London Line; New cross-river links in London’s Thames Gateway; possibly new (intermediate mode) tram or bus-based projects. 4Q.Pr7 Proposal 4Q.Pr7: The Mayor and TfL will consult on In May 2002 the Mayor announced Relevant boroughs are encouraged each of the intermediate mode proposals in 2001 to the go-ahead for all four schemes. to take account of the West London decide what schemes, if any, should be taken forward, Tram and East and London and with a view to completing planning, determining The West London and Cross River Greenwich Waterfront transit funding and financing, and starting the construction of schemes will be tram based, while proposals and identify how they a preferred scheme or schemes at the latest by 2004. phase one of the East London and will continue to engage with and Greenwich Waterfront Transit provide support for the ongoing schemes will be bus based. Detailed investigations and studies into the engineering design and preparation feasibility of the Cross River Tram of Business Case for West London project, being undertaken by TfL. Transit was completed in Spring 2004. A final decision on progressing the scheme is dependent on the outcome of the Spending Review 2004 (SR 2004).

The bus schemes will be implemented through a combination of highway and planning powers. Lip's Matrix 21/7/04 2:00 pm Page 126

MTS - Major projects LIP Guidance 2004 | 126 RefPPriority olicy or Proposal Progress summary and Borough response future plans All four of the boroughs involved with East London Transit and Greenwich Waterfront Transit phase one have agreed (at high level meetings with TfL) to transfer responsibility of the roads concerned to TfL for the Transit construction phase only - they would then revert back to borough responsibility.

- Highlighting denotes a priority area Ref- Denotes policy or priority reference number in the MTS Priority - Refers to priority area for implementation (Table 4-1) LIP Guidance 2004 127

Appendix D: Map of ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes 128 Transport for London LIP Guidance 2004 129

‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes 130 Transport for London

This page has intentionally been left blank LIP Guidance 2004 131

Appendix E: Local Authority parking and enforcement plans

1. Boroughs are required to produce a short stay parking needs of Parking and Enforcement Plan that fully businesses and visitors while reflect the objectives of the Transport discouraging non-essential and Strategy, as an integral part of their LIPs. commuter parking and resulting in an overall reduction in demand Aims of parking controls for parking 2. The main aims of parking controls Reviewing levels of on-street and should be to manage kerb-space camera enforcement for both effectively in order to: weekdays and weekend enforcement Help reduce traffic congestion Reviewing signage at all locations Help bus movements Ensuring signage on bus lanes is Improve safety adequate for Traffic Enforcement Support essential business activity Camera Operations (TECO) standards and improve reliability of servicing of enforcement Recognise and provide for special Improving co-ordination between needs where these exist, particularly boroughs, particularly at and across the needs of residents and people borough boundaries with disabilities Reviewing the provision of coach Recognise that many streets are parking and pick up points, unsuitable for parking of large particularly at visitor attractions vehicles Reviewing the provision of parking Complement congestion charging for powered two-wheelers Encourage a shift from the use of Increasing the supply of parking private cars to more sustainable for bicycles modes of transport. Supporting a comprehensive approach to the management of Parking control measures and on-street and off-street parking. activities 3. The measures and activities to be Review of existing restrictions considered should include: 4. Parking restrictions, and restrictions Introducing, strengthening or on loading and unloading, should be extending Controlled Parking Zones reviewed to help reinforce London’s (CPZs) in areas of parking congestion road hierarchy and ensure that they Allocating car parking space for reflect changing policy priorities. specific user groups and users on the Restrictions should be co-ordinated basis of essential and priority needs across boroughs and should take into account and, wherever possible, Ensuring that parking space is complement other traffic management effectively managed by time and measures, such as red route controls, price, providing for the essential 132 Transport for London

bus lane regulations and congestion Parking and Enforcement Plans charging. They should also reflect the 7. P arking and Enforcement Plans increasing demands on the road should include information on: network on Sundays, Bank Holidays and at night. The supply of parking, including: The hierarchy of street space 5. Highway authorities should undertake between different user groups by or complete reviews of existing parking area/parking zone and the quantity regulations. The aims of these reviews and type of waiting and loading should be to: restrictions Simplify regulations Details of the number of public car Complement and support public parks and spaces including spaces transport services, bus priority on yellow lined roads measures and other traffic Details of the number of private management measures residential and non-residential Take account of controls in parking spaces. neighbouring areas and boroughs Adapt to changes in demand for The demand for parking, including: parking and servicing and changing The type and number of parking policy objectives permits issued by area/parking zone Complement congestion charging Levels of usage of on and off-street Ensure that restrictions are parking space (including historical adequately signed for effective data where recorded). enforcement Levels of parking charges, including: Update and consolidate traffic On and off-street parking tariff regulation orders so that they are structure easily understood, accurate and consistent. Permit prices and their justification Current penalty charge band areas. 6. In reviewing regulations, highway authorities should seek to ensure a Compliance with parking regulations, comprehensive and logical approach to including: waiting and loading restrictions. On the Plans to deal with the issue of TLRN, this issue is addressed by a Local persistent evaders of traffic Plan approach recognising and balancing regulations. the needs of road users and types of frontagers. A similar approach should It is anticipated that this information be adopted for other main roads. should be available from existing sources. The Plan should set out how boroughs expect parking supply to change over time and the aims of policy in influencing this development. LIP Guidance 2004 133

8. Parking and Enforcement Plans Policies regarding the provision and should also include the following: review of waiting and loading A strategy statement setting out the restrictions. aims of local authority parking policy Identification of any issues regarding and its role in overall transport and compatibility with policies operating planning strategy in neighbouring areas and boroughs, A description of how parking policies including opportunities for wider use are designed to contribute to the camera technology objectives in the Mayor’s Strategies Appropriate maps (e.g. existing and notably how they will help reduce proposed CPZs, off-street parking, long-stay parking, bring about on-street parking, roadside improvements to bus services and enforcement camera locations etc.). maintain and enhance the economic viability of business and town 9. Boroughs are currently required to centres produce annual declarations to TfL and A clear strategy for effective the Mayor on parking income and enforcement. expenditure. Policies relating to the supply of parking places for people with disabilities, coaches and powered two-wheelers 134 Transport for London

This page has intentionally been left blank LIP Guidance 2004 135

Appendix F: Forms for completion of LIP proposals (Forms 1 & 2)

This Appendix gives guidance on how to Dates: State when the proposed complete the LIP Proposal Delivery activity/ies will take place, whether it is Form (Form 1) and the LIP Proposal a one-off activity, continuous or Summary Sheet (Form 2). Boroughs are recurring and when the activity/ies will strongly encouraged to use these forms be completed. in order to simplify the process of comparing and evaluating their LIPs. Description of Main Components: Give details of the main components of the LIP Proposal Delivery Form – activity/ies. Specify when these main Form 1 components will take place, consistent with the dates provided in the previous The format and principles of this form section. For activities continuing are based on the SIMPLA form used in beyond 2009/10 give indicative BSP bids. A separate Form I should be timescales and funding requirements/ used to describe programmes rather sources. Include relevant additional than individual projects or schemes, information such as causal chains, refer unless a project or scheme: to maps and other material. Is the sole component of a programme, or Funding: Enter the anticipated cost of the proposed activity/ies by year, where Is likely to be of major significance appropriate. Identify the likely sources in transport terms, or of income, including that from named Has a total annual cost greater partners. Identify funding required from than £100,000. TfL through BSP or other sources. The funding information provided in Forms 1 A separate Form 1 should also be used should add up to the summary of LIP for discrete programmes whose total funding described in Section 7.2. of this annual cost is less than £100,000 (e.g. guidance. travel awareness campaigns). Key Delivery Partners, Dependencies Form Number: This should contain a and Risks: Identify key delivery partners unique number to be used in (where appropriate) and critical completing Form 2. dependencies which are essential to deliver the scheme. Indicate the risks Summary of proposal: Provide a brief to delivery. description of the scheme, project or programme. Delivering the MTS in the borough: Provide a brief statement of how the Location: Details of where the proposed activity/ies delivers the proposed activity/ies will take place, relevant aspects of the MTS. Specific where appropriate. reference is also needed to the relevant 136 Transport for London

Mayoral priority areas for Form I contains a unique number which implementation, targets and MTS should be used to fill in the relevant policies and proposals set out in the boxes in Form 2 More than one LIP Matrix in Appendix C. proposal may be relevant to any given priority, policy, proposal or target. In Modal impacts: State which modes are these cases, the reference numbers for affected by this proposal and whether all the relevant Forms 1 should be listed the impact is positive, negative or in the relevant cell of Form 2. Where a neutral. priority, policy, proposal or target is not relevant to a borough, a reference to Cross Cutting Goals: Indicate the the relevant section of the LIPs policy impact (if any) on the cross cutting goals statement should be entered into the set out in Section 4.5. In particular appropriate cell (see Section 7.2.3). specify which E&I target groups are affected and whether this impact is Existing approved BSP schemes positive, negative or neutral. There may be approved BSP schemes LIP Proposal Summary that pre-date LIP preparation, Sheet - Form 2 particularly for 2006/07. The latest baseline programme form for existing This form is designed to provide a approved BSP schemes should be summary of a borough’s LIP proposals included in a borough LIP and the cross-referenced against the priority scheme identifier number entered on areas for implementation, policies, Form 2 in place of a Form 1 number. proposals and targets in the MTS as There is no need to complete a further they appear in the matrix in appendix C. Form 1 for such schemes. It has been pre-populated with the relevant references in the matrix. LIP Guidance 2004 137

Form Number: London Borough of:

Form 1 - LIP Proposal Delivery Form

Summary of proposal: ______

Location: ______

Dates: ______

Description of main elements: ______

______

______

______

______

______

______

______

Funding required to deliver programme / scheme proposals

Total funding table (£k) 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Total (£k) Funding required from BSP Funding from other sources (sum) (details to be provided below) Tot al funding required

Other funding sources Amount Status (£k) (Requested, Approved) Comments Tfl outside BSP Borough resources Partners (please specify) Other (please specify) 138 Transport for London MTS proposal/policy number (Appendix C) Impact Neutral) Negative, (Positive, Impact Neutral, NA) Negative, (Positive, number Priority area Target y Delivery Partners, Dependencies and Risks: Partners, y Delivery quality & Inclusion Target Group (please specify): quality & Inclusion Target equirements for sustainable developments: equirements for sustainable Modal Impact the Modes affected) (Please list Cross Cutting Goals (see section 4.5 of this Guidance) Ke Delivering the Mayor’s Transport Strategy in the borough: Transport the Mayor’s Delivering Promoting safety & perception of safety for all travel modes: of safety for all travel Promoting safety & perception means for travel: sustainable Encouraging allocation: road space Balanced R E Form 2 - LIP proposal summary sheet LIP Guidance 2004 | 139

Proposals, policies and targets

Categories as per matrix Priority area Proposal Policy Target Reference numbers of Form 1 (Appendix C)

Strategies 3.Po5 3.Po6 3.Po7 3.Po8 3.Po9 V 3.Pr1 10, 11 VI 3.Pr2 6, 12 VI 3.Pr4 6, 12 VI 3.Pr5 6, 12 VI 3.Pr6 6, 12 3.Pr7

Underground 4C.Pr12

DLR and Tramlink V 4D.Pr3 10, 11 4D.Pr4 4D.Pr5 V 4D.Pr6 10, 11 4D.Pr7

Rail 4E.Pr7 4E.Pr8 V 4E.Pr9 10, 11 4E.Pr10 V 4E.Pr13 10, 11 4E.Pr14 Denotes priority area 4E.Po3 Proposals, policies and targets 140

Categories as per matrix Priority area Proposal Policy Target Reference numbers of Form 1 (Appendix C)

Bus II 4F.Pr2 3, 4 II 4F.Pr3 3, 4 II 4F.Pr6 3, 4 II 4F.Pr7 3, 4 II 4F.Pr8 3, 4 V 4F.Pr11 10, 11 IV 4F.Pr21 7, 9

Streets IV 4G.Pr1 7, 9 4G.Po2 4G.Pr2 4G.Pr3 II 4G.Pr4 3, 4 I 4G.Pr7 1, 2 I 4G.Pr9 1, 2 VI 4G.Pr10 6, 12 VI 4G.Pr11 6, 12 III 4G.Pr12 5, 6, 7, 8 III 4G.Pr14 5, 6, 7, 8 4G.Po5 IV 4G.Pr15 7, 9 4G.Po6 IV 4G.Pr16 7, 9 IV 4G.Pr17 7, 9 III 4G.Pr18 5, 6, 7, 8 III 4G.Pr19 5, 6, 7, 8 III 4G.Pr20 5, 6, 7, 8 4G.Pr22 4G.Pr23 III 4G.Pr24 5, 6, 7, 8 VIII 4G.Pr25 14 Denotes priority area VIII 4G.Pr26 14 LIP Guidance 2004 | 141

Proposals, policies and targets

Categories as per matrix Priority area Proposal Policy Target Reference numbers of Form 1 (Appendix C)

Car 4H.Pr1 IV 4H.Pr2 7, 9 III 4H.Pr3 5, 6, 7, 8

Walking VI 4I.Pr2 6, 12 VI 4I.Pr3 6, 12 VI 4I.Pr4 6, 12 VI 4I.Pr6 6, 12 VI 4I.Pr7 6, 12 VI 4I.Pr8 6, 12

Cycling 4J.Po1 VII 4J.Pr1 13 VII 4J.Pr3 13 VII 4J.Pr4 13 VII 4J.Pr5 13 VII 4J.Pr6 13 VII 4J.Pr7 13 VII 4J.Pr8 13

Freight 4K.Pr1 4K.Pr2 III 4K.Pr3 5, 6, 7, 8 VI 4K.Pr4 6, 12 4K.Pr5

International issues 4L.Po6

Water 4M.Pr2 4M.Po2 Denotes priority area LIP Guidance 2004 | 142

Proposals, policies and targets

Categories as per matrix Priority area Proposal Policy Target Reference numbers of Form 1 (Appendix C)

Taxi 4N.Po2 4N.Pr1 V 4N.Pr5 10, 11

Accessible transport 4O.Po1 V 4O.Pr1 10, 11 4O.Po2 V 4O.Pr3 10, 11 V 4O.Pr4 10, 11 V 4O.Pr5 10, 11 V 4O.Pr6 10, 11 V 4O.Pr9 10, 11 V 4O.Pr12 10, 11 V 4O.Pr13 10, 11 V 4O.Pr14 10, 11

Integration 4P.Po2 4P.Pr3 III 4P.Pr4 5, 6, 7, 8 V 4P.Pr5 10, 11

Major projects 4Q.Po1 4Q.Pr7

Denotes priority area LIP's Part 5 5/8/04 10:30 am Page 143

LIP Guidance 2004 143

Appendix G: Acronyms and Glossary Acronyms AIMS Asset Inventory Management System ALG Association of London Government ALG TEC Association of London Government Transport and Environment Committee BIDs Business Improvement Districts BPRN Borough Principal Road Network BSP Borough Spending Plan BTEC British Training & Education Council BTP British Transport Police CAT Commission for Accessible Transport CCE Cycling Centre of Excellence CCS Congestion Charging Scheme CCTV Closed Circuit Television CPZs Controlled Parking Zones CRB Criminal Records Bureau CT Community Transport CTRL Channel Tunnel Rail Link DAISY Docklands Arrival Information Systems DaR Dial-a-Ride DDA Disability Discrimination Act DfT Department for Transport DLR Docklands Light Railway DTM Directorate of Traffic Management EDS Economic Development Strategy ETF Enforcement Task Force EWT Excess Waiting Time FQPs Freight Quality Partnerships FTA Freight Transport Association GLA Greater London Authority HGVs Heavy Goods Vehicles ITIS One UK private sector provider of traffic information JA Joint Arrangements LIP's Part 5 5/8/04 10:30 am Page 144

144 Transport for London

LA buses Local Authority buses LAS London Ambulance Service LATS London Area Transport Survey LBI London Bus Initiative LBPN London Bus Priority Network LBSL London Bus Services Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of TfL LCN London Cycle Network LDA London Development Agency LDFs Local Development Frameworks LEZ Low Emission Zone LGV Light Goods Vehicle LIPs Local Implementation Plans LLCS London Lorry Control System LMAP London Mobility Advisory Panel LSDP London Sustainable Distribution Partnership LTCC London Transport Control Centre LTIS London Traffic Information Systems LTUC London Transport Users Committee LUL London Underground Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of TfL MPA Metropolitan Police Authority MPS Metropolitan Police Service MTS Mayor’s Transport Strategy NHS National Health Service NRSWA New Roads & Street Works Act 1991 ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister ON Overground Network PCO Public Carriage Office PERS Pedestrian Environmental Review System PFI Private Finance Initiative PHV Private Hire Vehicle PLA Port of London Authority PPP Public Private Partnership PTAL Public Transport Accessibility Level RBK&C Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea SELTRANS South East London Transport Strategy LIP's Part 5 5/8/04 10:30 am Page 145

LIP Guidance 2004 145

SLA Service Level Agreements SMS Short Message Service - mobile phone text SPAs Special Parking Areas SPG Supplementary Planning Guidance SRA Strategic Rail Authority SRB Single Regeneration Budget SRDFs Sub-Regional Development Frameworks SSSA Streets and Social Space Audit SVD Selective Vehicle Detection SWT South West Trains TECO Traffic Enforcement Camera Operations TfL Transport for London TLRN Transport for London Road Network TOCs Train Operating Companies TOCU Transport Operational Command Unit TPED Transport Policing and Enforcement Directorate TWA Transport and Works Act UDC Urban Development Corporation UDPs Unitary Development Plans WHO World Health Organisation

Glossary 146 Transport for London

Glossary ‘A’ Roads and busy bus routes – The roads marked on the map in Appendix D in the LIPs Guidance are: TLRN and Principal ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes. Blue Book – A reference guide containing the details of the 320 routes (or runs) that are required knowledge for the London Taxi driver.

Capital Call – A complementary service to Taxicard, providing subsidised door-to- door transport for people with mobility problems, using ‘private hire vehicles’

Delivery Curfew Initiative – An investigation of night-time goods deliveries coordinated by the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership (LSDP).

Enforcement Task Force – created to take forward the work outlined in the Enforcement Plan. Consists of the ALG, TfL, Metropolitan and City Police. Its purpose is to improve coordination of the Traffic Enforcement Strategy in London. Equality and Inclusion target groups – TfL, the Mayor, the GLA and other functional bodies focus on the following groups:

Women

Disabled people

People from black and minority ethnic groups

Lesbians, gay men, bisexual and transgendered people

Older people, children and young people

People of faith and belief

Local Development Framework – Act comes into force July 2004. The LDF will consist of a number of documents setting out the local authority’s policies for meeting the economic, environmental and social aims for the future of their area.

London boroughs – Defined as the London boroughs, Corporation of London, City of Westminster and the Royal boroughs.

London Bus Initiative (LBI) – A package of measures to improve bus services, including bus priority and service improvements, which seeks to improve total journey quality, and is delivered by a partnership of agencies. London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) – An 860km bus network covering the main bus routes, in which bus priority and other traffic management measures are introduced to improve reliability and reduce overall journey times. LIP Guidance 2004 147

London Cycle Network plus (LCN+) – is a planned 900km network of radial and orbital routes for cyclists covering the whole of London, which will be completed in 2009.

Overground Network (ON) – is a pilot scheme for metro-style rail services, which is being launched on four key South London routes:

Waterloo to Teddington via Wimbledon

Waterloo to Twickenham via Richmond

Victoria to East and West Croydon via Norbury

London Bridge to Dartford via Greenwich.

Private Finance Initiative Government funding initiatives using private funding.

Private Hire Vehicles A term covering minicabs, chauffeur driven services and executive car services.

Streets Faults Contact Centre is a contact centre aimed at reporting faults on the TLRN and passing on other faults to the relevant highway authority.

Taxicard Scheme provides disabled residents with subsidised journeys in accessible taxis.

Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) This is described in the Greater London Authority Act 1999 as the Greater London Authority Road Network. The Mayor has decided to call this the Transport for London Road Network. It comprises 550km of London’s red routes and other important streets.

Transport Policing and Enforcement Directorate – established by TfL in 2002 to bring all TfL enforcement activities together.

Travel Instruction – an orientation programme where disabled people are given confidence building measures such as explaining bus timetables, how to make use of accessibility features, introduction to local bus and train routes to enable them to use mainstream public transport rather than door-to-door services. 148 Transport for London

Notes

Address: Transport for London Website: www.tfl.gov.uk/lips Windsor House Contact: [email protected] 42-50 Victoria Street London SW1H 0TL