Transport Safety this Safety Yours on Valerie The Enc: ‘Feet I Boris Mayor My More London London Following Dear City
welcome City
how
Deputy
further
Queen’s
Hall
Tf
Val
First:
London
ever, Johnson
in of
L’s Hall,
in to
SE1
Shawcross
Assembly
London’
London
your for
response your
London’ further
Improving
with
Mayor
2M
Walk London,
London’s
scrutiny
work
you.
improve
for
to
Transport
AM
around
Pedestrian
Transport,
the SE
full
of 1
pedestrian London
safety
response 24A
pedestrian
Committee
MAYOR
• Safety
Isabel
and
Assembly’s [email protected]
to
safety
build
Dedring, the
safety
in
London’
eight
and
in
report
OF
report
in
January
expand
would
London
recommendations
report.
LONDON —
‘Feet
‘Feet
of
be
strategic
and
this
happy
First: •
First: Iondon.gov.uk
look
year,
Improving
support
to
forward
Improving
in
please
discuss
the
Date:
for
recently
find
to
Pedestrian
any
pedestrian •
further
Pedestrian
enclosed 020
aspect
published
08 7983
discussions
of
issues.
AU 4000
2014
2.3.
2.2.
2.1.
2.
1.3.
1.2.
1.1. TfL’s
1.
Improving
Recent
Background
While
to
pedestrians
share
per cent towards trend
on
in
In
Action
In people
roll
gyratory
pedestrian
There
includes
improve
with
KSIs There
baseline
published
Seriously
The
pedestrian
(TfL).
ensure
London.
2013,
2011
the
response
cent
out
of
an
safety
that
is
the
(in
KSI
We
2005-09
is
has
Plan
all
to
of
vital
Pedestrian
and
ambitious
our
of
pedestrian
pedestrian
systems
an
the
terms
of
pedestrians reduction
the
navigate
seemed
casualties
Injured
welcome
trends
all
However,
Safe
been
detection
safety,
of
2005-09
involved
extensive
(PSAP)
target.
2012
in
roll
innovative
fatalities.
pedestrians
order
of
baseline.
to
out
Streets
a
journey
such
(KSI)
there
target
to
significant
along
around
in
KSIs
the
safety the
discussed of
to
on average,
in
Safety
technology
figures
be
are
KSIs
range
pedestrian
collisions. as
This reach
casualties
London
was
London’s
for
emerging
Legible
of
with
were
However,
London
stages)
safe
Tottenham
is
and
the
for
reducing
London:
is
a
for
of very
in
reduction
this
its
A
worrying
city.
set
2013
down
in
below
to
work
2013 Assembly
London’
significant
London
at recommendations
London
make
important
roads,
goal.
countdown
of
within
over
and
crossings;
These
last
A
is
Assembly’s
26
25 underway
KSI
and
show
Hale
road
positive,
the
the
in
year
increase
walking
per
per
wayfinding
35
the
casualties
and
the
attached
are
Transport
long
and
reduction
last
a
safety
cent.
to
cent
per
context
pedestrians
significant
number
at
to
set
improving
the
across
10
Euston
term
much
cent
more
traffic
further
on
in
out
Mayor
action
years.
the
on
as
by
2012
system
report
of
of
trend
Committee’s
in
in
work
desirable
of
signals;
an
TfL
how
40
pedestrians
number
Circus;
all
the
reduce
the
reversal
pedestrian
some
plan and
still
In
appendix.
figures,
per
serious
and
shows
still
safety
number
June
Pedestrian
to
accounted
‘Feet
Transport
cent for
make
trials
of
other
and
the
needs
of
in
of
London
2013,
London’s
strong
and
pedestrian
can
injuries London.
investigation
by
number
continuing
the
having
of
Killed
of
it parties
First:
2020,
to
31
pedestrian
be
easier
new
short
Safety
we
for
for
be
progress
per
2020,
improved.
and
and
a
This
major
London
of
done
19
from
to
mode
term
cent
for
KSIs
the
49
per
into a 3. Pedestrian Safety Action Plan
3.1. Building on the Safe Streets for London plan, the PSAP sets out 31 actions to further improve pedestrian safety in London. It has been developed in partnership with the Pedestrian Safety Working Group (PSWG), which includes a broad range of stakeholders including Living Streets, 20’s Plenty for Us, RoadPeace. Transport for All, London Councils and Sustrans.
3.2. Some of the key action areas include the publication of London’s first Pedestrian Design Guidance; development of a Gold Standard’ pedestrian crossing that would utilise the latest technology to improve safety; trialling 20mph limits on the Transport for London Road Network and the trialling of Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) technology on buses.
3.3. On 31 March 2014, the PSAP was issued in draft form online for public comment, closing on 9 May. There were over 100 responses during the public comment period from members of the public, London boroughs and other key stakeholders. Stakeholders have welcomed the Plan and feedback has been largely positive. Public and stakeholder comments have helped to shape the final version of the Plan, published on 11 July 2014.
3.4. The PSAP is an important step forwards in addressing pedestrian safety, reducing pedestrian KSIs and making London a more attractive city to enjoy on foot. We are grateful to all those who have played a part in shaping the PSAP, including the London Assembly Transport Committee through its investigation into pedestrian safety.
3.5. Detailed responses to the Committee’s recommendations are contained in this report. We welcome the findings, many of which align with the actions in Safe Streets for London and the PSAP.
4. Responses to the recommendations made by the London Assembly in ‘Feet First: Improving Pedestrian Safety in London’
4,1. Recommendation I
We recommend that the Mayor and TfL should demonstrate their commitment to improving pedestrian safety by:
Adopting the Vision Zero approach to eliminating road death and injury
4.1.1. Safe Streets for London sets out our ambition for roads free from death and serious injury, in line with the Vision Zero principles. Chapter Three, section 3.4, outlines the new approach being taken by us, acknowledging that people make mistakes, and proposing that a safe system is needed that accommodates human error and unpredictability.
4.1.6.
4.1.5.
4.1.4.
4.1.3.
4.1.2.
•
The
Appointing
The
The
Developing
The
that
walking
level
on
key
officials pedestrians
It
walking
reduction
above
we
by to
casualty
reduction
among
KSls,
motorcycles
injured
London’s injuries
to
approach
those
from
shorter
per
is
meet
London’s
interests
different
improve
Mayor
will
strategic
Mayor
this
people
PSAP,
within
cent
the
therefore
its
responsible
also
on
these
by within
trips
longer-term
the
term
numbers
to
current
impact reduction
in
target.
has
roads
has throughout,
creating
London’s
a
TfL,
as
can
support pedestrian
road
overall
a
of
report
KSIs
roads
expected.
outcomes
representative accounted
at
actions
three
series
the
a
committed
pedestrians
set
with
use
a
the
daughter
by
of
user
Pedestrians
24
senior
is
GLA
the
by
on
and
for
40
40
safe,
human
in
groups
largest
and all
ambition
senior
per
roads
this
of
to
road
levels
groups.
KSIs
challenging
road
per
per
which
the
safety
and
public
which
specific
for
reduce
enjoy’.
cent
attractive level;
to
goal;
document
cent
cent
more
user
are
in error.
officers
reductions
will
almost
by
safety
TfL.
increase
of
to
is
mode
2013.
of
in
transport
are
make
2020,
risk
already
need
These reduction
by
casualties
reflected
group
the
champion
London.
This
ambitious,
target
to
in
target
2020.
80
and
in
owning
share.
Therefore,
Plan
up
to
‘continue
London
to
which
is
levels terms
per
and,
are
outcomes
Safe
championed
the
accessible
be
supported
networks’
reductions
that
People
of in
target.
cent
needed
As in
made
their
largest
where
the
in
walking
considering
reducing
of
of
Streets
London.
to
underpins
turn
such,
the
walking
casualties
of
progress
actions
strive
delivery.
We
walking,
to
are
all
and
downward
the
by
informs
group
amongst
streets
achieve
the
for
by those
and
in
will
all
pursued
two
to
The
data
‘to
in
pedestrian
that
a
London,
the
40
KSI
the
protect
continue
in
of
London,
per
number the
support
of
cycling
and
ambition
the
killed
reducing
per
is
have
vulnerable
additional
the
pedestrians
interim
Surface
casualties
trend
distance
interests
sufficiently
at
development
public
cent
2020
all
the or
incorporates
been
and
an of
to
over
road
in
seriously
deaths
target
requires
target
senior
casualties
highest report
Transport’s
increase
spaces
casualties
casualty
riding
number
travelled
road
developed
on
and
of
users
in
robust,
of
for
order
and
user
of
a
all
this
in
40 of
4.1.11.
4.1.10.
4.1.9.
4.1.8.
4.1.7.
Publishing
In
We
Developing
committed
areas
education All
marketing,
range
bridges. Further
the
allows
informal
road the
Our
Street
with
suitable
London.
centres
London-wide
conic options
street
free
London
enhancements.
significant
projects
also
improve
that
locations,
across
innovative
range
addition
the
are
Pedestrian
regular
response
external
up’
network’
will
provide
have
of
locations,
actions
temporary, event
and
actively
of
evidence
the
being
and
funding
budgets
use
space
This
have
and
the
to
schemes
to
&
to
a
traffic
such
Oxford
proportion
been
traffic
Legible
Capital;
promote
and
training
this
fully-costed
villages.
or
of
funding
urban
extensive
stakeholders.
programmes
programme
has
by
to
considered,
in
significant
for
looking
roads
programme
Safety
as
such
we
models.
sponsoring
the
the
infrastructure,
exploiting
heavily
across
of
free
traffic-free
included
different
Street.
Elephant that
London
realm
the
actively
investment
and
PSAP
Roads
and
A
and
as
the
of
days
at
Action
working
importance
funding
have
our
this
borough
involved
Regent
benefits
developing
delivering
and
benefits
budget
of
streets
from
through
the
Living
are
uses.
at
developing
of
wayfinding
Task
support
Business
‘open
funding
and
events
been,
a
events
major
make
fully
Plan. potential
policing
large-scale
to
in
a
group
Street,
This
Force Castle
as
LIP
for
in Streets’
single
the
for
the
streets’
of
Local
of
or
funded.
the
planning
for
them
locations
public a
delivers
pedestrians.
or
to
funding.
the
walking
improvement
walking;
London
Plan
are
includes
range will
programme
a
actions
public
and
(RTF)
supporting
promote
Victoria
to
large-scale
and
business
Implementation
implementation
Walking
better
soon
refine
centred
either
spaces
including
pedestrianisation
safer
This
Old
of
and pedestrian
in
can
enjoyment
TfL boroughs
commits
exploring
pedestrian
included
to
Embankment the
and
the
walking.
Street
permanently
funding
developing
transport,
Examples
officers
be,
be
case
Month
with
on
a
which
of
West event
options
safer
large-scale,
highways
seen
London’s
introduced
some
to
a
and
and
to
within
and
the
in
programme
Plan
earlier
is
There
continues
‘get
End
working
in
for
events
invest
through
of
some
drawn
freight
Kings
available,
of
considering
central
include
public
scope
the
pedestrians.
the
more
or
and
such
(LIP)
the
the
investment,
event
diverse
are
this
temporarily
PSAP
recurring
across
in
of
across
actions
Cross,
from
in
city’s
London’s
Plan.
initiatives,
the
for
realm
their
from
to
as
funding;
London
a
London’s
the
year
these
that
in
number
working
expand
more
Regent
wide
town
and
a
busiest
central
London
own
our
to
wide
and
in
We
open
are
to
a
of a
4.2.4.
4.2.3.
4.2.2.
4.2.1.
pedestrian
4.2.
in
We
4.1.12.
place
recommend
•
Action
In
We
Commissioning
We
Working
Recommendation
monthly
Publishing
around
is tfl.gov.
pedestrian
police
pedestrian
2010;
types
set
Statistics
casualties
particular
to
this,
complete
result
roadside
pedestrian
show
pedestñan
future,
solely
to
The
order
to
due
help
will
are
each
out
review
casualties,
we
PSAP
29
of
for
collision
in
their
uk/cdn/static/cmsfdocuments/pedestrian-fatalities-in-london.pdf.
also
to
working
improving
the
in
inform Also,
are
injuries
more
in
action,
with
basis
gain
publication reporting
(HES)
PSAP
injury
picture
that,
amongst
fatalities
fatalities.
the
causes
be
respective
safety
data
its does
working injuries;
many
the
a
effective
accurate
undertaking
PSAP
files
approach
by
in
to
types
as
meaningful
updates
sustained
action
and
including:
on
of
pedestrian
not
conjunction
police
enable
benefit
October
and
2
this
procedures
for
of
between
vulnerable
pedestrians.
pedestrians
This
with
Trauma
in
include
gives
the
and
funding
pedestrian
29.
would
potential
2016.
deployment
data
and
follows
the
on
of
initiatives
wider
to
prevent
will
an
a
review,
2014,
safety
safety.
pedestrian
collection
data
2011
a
Audit
commitment
Metropolitan
with
NHS
limit
in
help
levels
cost
via
road
and preventions depth
This
on
Killed
fatalities
collection,
TfL
the
the
the
future
and
cameras
and
to
us
this
plan
in
As
of
from
user
in
more
produce
will
the
flexibility
should
plan
NHS
use
resources.
study
allowing
2015
such,
the
Research
new
and
showing
pedestrian
casualty
injuries
our
include
plan
to
Police
of
in
plan.
counter
timely
to
or
research
and
commission
of to
a
2012
Seriously
it
London
sharing
provide
have
are
20mph
mobile
is
pedestrian
better of
a
much
will and
Service
not
comprehensive
analysis
sums
Network
the
analysis;
research
broader
publication,
measures
casualties.
considered,
build
meaningful
collisions.
2006-2010’,
plan
understand
greater
will
a
application.
limits
and
of
Injured
more
follow
(MPS)
look
funding
of
on
fatalities.
to
data.
in
analysis
for
conducted
Hospital
redirect
the
their
statistical
accurate
to
at
‘Analysis
This
example,
up
In
(KSI)
to
target
Identifying
to
police
knowledge
and
serious
available
to
This
addition
database
impact
research
improve
split
The
research
be
relating
funding
Episode
put
on
these
will
and
files
analysis
allocated
the
of
report
before
to
a
injury
than
plans
to
the
at
for
into
of
in
to is
4.2.10.
4.2.9.
4.2.8.
4.2.7.
4.2.6.
4.2.5.
Analysing
Provisional
In
Casualty,
Casualty
We
and Safe
network.
road
www.tfl.gov.
measures
be casualty
Department
KSls casualties
reports/quarterly-progress-reports.
reports
http://www.tfl.gov.uklcorporate/publications-and-reports/road-safety.
London.
safety
analysis
TfL
ACCSTATS
efficient decisions
line
source
database.
understanding
STATS19
with
developed
makes
collisions
approach
addition,
available
already
to
website,
and
safety
Streets
the
in
advise
data
available
London,
data
used
figures
and
use
This
allows
of
collision
public,
existing
casualty
about
progress and
by
to
that
The
national
measures
almost
to
undertake
about
uk/roadsafety.
for
by
for
simple
of
along
Lite collision
for data
2020,
boroughs
information
access
casualties
the
Transport
ACCSTATS
late resources.
will
both
London
for
road
are
action,
reporting
at
web-based
and
the
provision,
a
collision with
impact
and
London,
reporting
http://www.tfl.gov.
summer
towards
from
reduce
to
available
decade
TfL
safety
figures
casualty
circumstances
across
vehicle
extensive
access
collision
of
yearly
leading
(SSfL),
and
the
in
is
(Dffl,
collisions
priority
of
available
KSIs;
stakeholders
London.
including
collision
the
2014
to
of
2005-09
tool
data
system,
road
for
the London’s
data
from
online
data
data
ensure
road
to London’s
ilL
figures, Mayor’s
analysis
London,
Transport
provides
locations
safety
on
to
more
files
ilL
files
online
and
will
safety
and
of
develop
and
the
are
at
uk/corporate/publications-and
the
baseline,
The
easier
throughout
boroughs
for
personal
also
going effective
casualties
including
target
interventions
TfL
of as
casualty
processed
new
and
number
road
and
easy
use
2013
figures.
for
for
existing
reported
publish
website
access
boroughs
predictive
web-based
back
casualty
London
safety
to
of
of
is
access
are
injury
to
interventions
share
‘open
a
reported
of
the
database
the
This
on
40
make
to
collision
also
pedestrian
quarterly
in
to
at
by
plan,
number
year.
2005,
in
London’s
TfL’s
per
Road
road
reduction
to
source’
the
information
to
provides
the
London.
freely
road
more
tools
this
track
cent
in
set
latest
In
traffic
ACCSTATS
police
is
allowing
data
Network
quarterly
provisional
of
information
line
the
out
and
safety
available
have
techniques
informed
reduction
KSIs.
progress.
roads
pedestrian
detailed
on
The
information
to
collisions
key
an
with
under
more
more
their
inform
been
the
open
(TLRN),
new
This
and
data
progress
the
on
the
easily
in
road
road
on
TfL
in
will
the
KSI
in on 4.2.11. In March 2014, we published the Road Risk and Vulnerable Road User Working Paper which brought together Stats 19 data with London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS) data to demonstrate the level of exposure and risk posed to vulnerable road users, including pedestrians. This analysis has helped inform many of the actions in the PSAP and has enabled consideration of how risk may change across London and its population in the future. Indeed, we are actively using this to identify measures in the Plan that will help to reduce the level of risk posed to pedestrians in the future.
4.2.12. In addition to this, we undertake extensive analysis of the road network to identify locations where a higher number of road users are killed and seriously injured, to inform the delivery of engineering measures across the TLRN. We share this information with the boroughs to help inform their own road safety programmes on their own roads.
Bringing together local engineers from TfL and the boroughs with road crash investigators from the Met Police to produce joint reports on the causes of serious collisions
4.2.13. The investigation into serious and fatal collisions is currently undertaken by the Serious Collision Investigation Unit (SCIU). As part of the overall investigative strategy the SCIU already utilise information from a variety of sources including ilL and borough engineers. From December 2014 the SCIU as part of the new Roads and Transport Policing command (RTPC) will maintain their initial response to serious and fatal collisions, but will now take primacy for all matters that require a secondary investigation due to complexity.
4.2.14. As of this year we have established the Road Fatality Review Group which provides a forum where collision investigators, road designers, enforcement agencies and non-governmental organisations come together to discuss specific locations and develop joint problem solving approaches.
42.15. The police are also consulted when any safety scheme is proposed on the road network.
4.3. Recommendation 3
We recommend that TfL demonstrates leadership in how it works with boroughs to identify and improve pedestrian collision hotspots by:
Reporting to the Assembly, by October 2014, on how it will work with boroughs to develop plans to treat the 24 current pedestrian collision hotspots;
4.3.1. To date! good progress has been made on addressing the 24 locations identified for further study to improve pedestrian safety. Of the 24 locations, 12 fall on the TLRN and 11 are being addressed to improve safety through one of a number of major improvement programmes being overseen by our Road Space Management Directorate. The 12th site, at Camden High Street/Parkway, was part of an improvement scheme delivered in 2012 and is currently being monitored through our Traffic Accident Diary System (TADS).
4.3.6.
4.3.5.
4.3.4.
4.3.3.
432.
•
We
Reviewing
Safe
We
Publishing
Since
We Of
example
and
as
new
however
a
introduced
modelling
which
improvements, TLRN
list
vulnerable
‘critical
fatal
safety
London’s
towards
encouraging
they
Transport
all
LIP
road
programme The
improvement
We
currently
statutory
the
carry
standard
undertake
of
London
are
procedures.
Streets
funding
schemes
wifl
and
other
wish
2013,
networks.
locations
road
12
and
engineering.
also list’
out
prioritise
of these
we
serious
locations
main
not
road
to
to
across
requirement
nine
data
road
an
where
is
for
safety
boroughs
we
for
a
on
working
feel
to
or
address
the
publish
detailed
used
being
Road
do
plans
annual
sites.
improve
London
their
London
where
but
have
have
roads
safety
locations
It
users
is
that
boroughs
collisions
not
conversations
is
we
engineering
the
included; that
where
to
These
Safety
addressed
ultimately
own
for
with
provided
been
have undertaking
those
to
are
these
identify
(TLRN)
TLRN
there
collision
list
(pedestrians,
audit
contains
fall
the
safety.
only
Road
help
schemes
the
are
raising
there
of
an
singled
Audit are
on
have through
area.
locations
hotspots
are
for
with
them
processes
hotspot
boroughs
either
locations
adverse
that
borough
the
Network
lists
measures
locations
We
analysis
or
roads
is
no
with
an
occurred,
the (RSA)
a
RSAs
considered
a
decision
are
out
and
of
identify
are
previously
potential
action
on
LIP
clear
cyclists
bar
these
that
and
priority
locations
managed
suitable
for
impact
the
providing
with
to
to roads,
as
guidance
annually
(TLRN);
on
where
in
to
are
are
safety whether
action
utilise
encourage
to
the
standard borough’s
in
road
of
the
boroughs
make
safety
and
impact
identify locations
developed.
particular
treated
for
each
on
existing
we
key
for
TLRN
a
the
safety
issue.
by
as
motorcyclists).
to
to
information
action
road disproportionate
to
understand
improvements
sure
or
concerns
collision
the
individual part
prioritise
be
on
skills
channel
practice
‘critical
not
on
them
to
LIP
is
safety
plans
for
improved
engineering the
Highways
collisions
by
that
encourage
important
of
an
they
Major
of
The
casualty
the
the
Highway.
to
hotspots
annual
our
list’
for
on
pedestrian
their
on and
locations
and
borough
undertake
that
choose
‘critical borough’s
relevant
the
safety
Projects
all
own
locations
through
involving
data
is
Agency;
on
LIP
to
only
number
reduction
schemes
basis.
further
TLRN,
standards.
a
ensure
on
These
RSA
the
further
to
funding
list’
and
on as
three
borough.
their
invest
RSAs
own
road
to
The
is
on
team
of
action
for
are
a how
that
to
are the
4.4.2.
4.4.1.
4.4.
creating
We
4.3.9.
4.3.8.
4.3.7.
recommend
‘Reporting,
‘Developing
Road
TfL
Recommendation
We
We
implement
as
with
limits
Southwark,
Local zones safety
installation
close
Our
of
pedestrians,
pages,
safety
crossings,
for
an
monitoring.
issues
procedure
safety.
following
the
procedure then
are
However,
appropriate
pedestrian
scheme,
nature
appropriate
recognises
such,
the
agree
action periodically
people
RSA
a
safety
RSA.
considered.
happen
to
pedestrian
Implementation
number
and in
road
concerns.
which
We
of
e.g.
one
boroughs
London.
with
procedure
that
from
link:
in
20
many
by
to
limits
of it
issues
is
is
was
Lambeth
are
a
element
network
the
quarter
via
is
to
including
strongly
report
20mph
in at
mph
will
method
September
that
this
the
of vehicle
fundamental
minor
review
specify
currently
a
the
launched
final
http://www.ffl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/road
across
of
modelling
For
London
The
also
consistent
of
Mayor
recommendation
4
slower
zones
have
To
the
forefront
issues
has
of
speeding
(such
major
PSAP
and zones
works
with
intention
emphasised
Plans
date,
our
be
safety
speeds
to
total
roads
pedestrian
London.
all
and
been
undertaking
boroughs
the
and
capture
speeds
and enhanced
in
2014,
RSA
20mph
as
the
relating
schemes
is
to
TfL
and
length.
to
to
(LIPs).
May
and
of
publish
City
in
information.
done,
limits
road
written
address
TfL
or
major
our
tools
is
across
international
the
procedure.
has
limits
on
These
joined
a
2014
that
can
of
and modelling
should
RSA
speed
as
lack
to marking
including It
city.
widely
from
and
the
helped
In to
and
London
works,
that
is
a
specifically
this
safety
its
a
play
on
addition,
provide
this.
and
monitor
London
actively
review
of
priority cover
procedure
up
scope
It
where
support
the
findings
borough
have
tool
limits
encompasses
compliance
demonstrate
on
an
way
The
can
boroughs
This
schemes).
some
such
best
to
is
Committee
lslington,
their
important
3,855
will
to
further
included
a
ensure
this
in
for
be
across
supporting,
TfL most
pedestrian
by:
to
new
from
significant
for
ensure
practice.
the
as
sit
roads
of
and
that
viewed
increasing
roads.
50
is
officers
km
London
which
poorly
prominently
current
recent
action
the
deliver
TfL
information
with
per
that
Hackney,
authorities.
It
the
actions
of
role
for
and
across
that all
would
their
case
TfL
necessary
London’s on-line
cent
needs
crossings
changes
will
all
types
and
are positioned pedestrian
will
feedback
version
in
reflecting
we
over
the
LIP
has:
schemes.
commitment
improving
it
the
not
therefore
working
by
from
London,
funding
make
have
will
Camden.
current
guidance
on
of
of
400
for
at
percentage
have
2016;
to
roads,
of
improvement
pedestrians
be
our
the
to
and
this
included
it
20
the
the
speed on
element
part
easier
the
closely
web
a
via
not
road
other
mph
safety
unique
and,
of
to be
4.4.7.
4.4.6.
4.4.5.
4.4.4.
4.4.3.
Publishing
Using
In
As
In
•
•
•
•
•
by
enhance approach
buses.
TLRN
could
20
implementation walking,
Norton the
London Tottenham
important Tower
cent
limits
‘movement’ increasing
be
Committee’s
20mph
addition,
the
Highway
September
mph
Offered
Provided
the Articulated
Provided
achieved.
achieved
Provided
20th
the
of
wake
be
are
on
Bridge,
roads
Folgate.
London’s
needs
limits
Bridge,
of
including
RTF
used
places,
those to
on
streets
TfL
a
recognition of
July
support
Authorities
Hale.
implementation and
timescale
monitoring funding
borough
maps
on.
aspiration
managed
the
on
report
converted
more
to
in
the
2014;
and
this
King
road
while
the
a
continue
place’
roads
with
report
Blackfriars
IMAX
number
of
in
year.
widely
compliance.
as
TLRN
through
William
the
analysing
types
roads,
a
also
that
for
a
for by
managed
of through
need
high by
roundabout,
two
framework,
specific
These
to
95
the
50
the
implementing
on
to
speed
of
seeking
to
identified
there
be
‘place’
Street,
TLRN
LIPs.
to
per
per
Bridge,
understand policy
London
the
reduce
Mayor’s
taken
be
crash
the
18
This
cent
cent
by
roads
limits
roads
are
better
routes
to function
month Traffic
documents
Gracechurch
ilL.
we
New
New
will
by data
of
of
casualties,
minimise
boroughs.
also
as
Roads
have
that
that
will
London’s
London’s
These
London’s
balanced.
help
the
suitable
20mph
Bridge
in
Cross
trials
Accident
an
and
casualty
learn
TfL
the
an
most
to
increasing
Task
the
its
in include,
important
manages, City
high
determine
Gate,
Street,
increase
Street,
lessons
speed
the
roads,
roads
support
boroughs
effective
by
impacts
While
Force
Diary
of
reduction
levels
City
the
Rotherhithe
London
Camden
with
Farringdon
Bishopsgate
a
number
limits
System
the
from
(RTF),
role
take
Roads
active
for
and
strong
where
of
on
means
if
a
majority
20mph
cycling
the
to
traffic
needs
20
where
to
in
to
across
travel
play
there
on
High
economically
guide
lead
(TADS).
20
Task
20
Transport
mph
of
Tunnel
Street,
the
and
mph
mph
limits
to
and
and where
we
of
Street,
on
and
is
limit
the
Force,
the
five
be
20mph
have
on
limits
and
on
is
per to 4.4.8. As part of our response to the Roads Task Force report, 20mph speed limits on the TLRN are currently being trialled on an experimental basis to enable further understanding of their impacts. Current sites include Waterloo IMAX Roundabout and Camden High Street. Starting in July 2014 a trial will commence on two TLRN routes in the City of London, where conclusions and recommendations willfollow the trial period which will end in 2016. Action 11 of the PSAP outlines our commitment to these trials and the potential to roll these out over similar schemes in the future.
Publishing guidance for the boroughs on implementing street type classification, by September 2014;
4.4.9. We will publish guidance for the boroughs on how to agree and implement RTF street types in December 2014. This report will include existing street type maps where agreed with London boroughs, plus RTF themed indicators for movement and place performance. Reporting, by September 2014, on the scope for more support, including funding, for boroughs to install more 20mph zones.
4.4.10. We continue to encourage and support boroughs that wish to implement 20mph limits on their road network. To date, we have already funded 400 such schemes. Action 12 in the final PSAP outlines our commitment to encourage more boroughs to deliver 20mph schemes through their LIP programmes in order to create safer environments for pedestrians in London. Activity on this action is already underway.
4.5. Recommendation 5
We recommend that the Mayor and TfL should review the safety and quality of pedestrian crossings in London, including:
Using an assumed walking speed of 0.8 metres per second to calculate minimum crossing times; We are committed to ensuring that crossings are safe for all who use them and the actions we’ve developed as part of the PSAP demonstrate this.
In 2010, we updated our traffic signal design standards to align with the Department for Transport’s (Dft’s) latest national guidance. This guidance is accepted as the national standard and provides minimum safe design parameters for traffic signal timings.
All pedestrian crossing sites are now designed to ensure that they provide:
• At least a 6-second green man invitation-to-cross period (which is the time for pedestrians to step off the kerb and start their crossing)
• A blackout period, designed to enable pedestrians walking at the DIE-set assumed speed of 1.2m/s, to safely complete their crossing once the green man has gone out. The assumed ‘normal’ walking speed of 1.2m/s is utilised both within the UK and internationally as the basis for pedestrian crossing timings.
4.5.3.
4.5.2.
4.5.1.
helpful
public
actually
Pedestrian
crossing
to
have
illuminated) There
man
leave
is
Safety both
This
Conducting
•
•
•
•
Whilst
awareness
TLRN
monitoring
decreases
carry
timing
below
increase
are
is
changed
people
signals
countdown
illuminated
actions
based
allow
the
a
meaning
a
a
at
home
research
that
highlight
A
London,
the
the
will
monitored
common
Countdown
number
trial
which
out
pedestrian new kerb.
considerations
throughout
the we
reviews,
pedestrians
to
green
enable development
on
have
and
that
in
of
safety
the
since
do
cross
six-second
‘gold’
a
and
in
of
It
KSls
pedestrian
display. continues
to
road
that
complemented
for
any
to
walking
of
address
importance
not is
green
Pedestrian
misconception
this
man
through
cross
the
better
screening
the
the
and
sites
audits
safely.
standard
2010,
technology,
controlled
in
crossings;
at
plan
safety
the
is
number
practice,
time
blackout
crossing
a
more
invitation
the
one
the
speed
across
are
of
site
understand
year
standard
to
pedestrian
to
on
by
the
split
green
an
as
introduce
road.
of
provide
audits
Countdown
of
central
time
will
for
all
process.
March
Traffic
which
online
well
crossings the
of
cycle
road
a
of
by
the
London.
period
time
that
locations
which
all
be
periods.
continued
pedestrians
The
than
man
0.8
TfL’s
key
set
as
combined
new
of
to
investigated.
safety;
safe
pedestrians
would
crossings
to
offset
2015;
contributory
Accident
reporting
mIs,
a
the
green
all
by
our
reasons
supplements that
the
invitation
be
new
programme
and
by
that
crossing
the
We
sites
where
blackout
extensive
the
extended
1.2m/s
optimisation
be follows
2016;
marketing
minimum
upgraded man
they
Dif.
waiting
monitor
green
picked
PSAP
Diary
tool
directly.
TfL
where
to
there
have
factors
Therefore,
is
prescribed
may
passage.
All
(where
cross
that
period
developed
to
in
the
System
man
accordingly
rolhng
does
to
up
road
new
campaign
fact
only
crossing
have
double
Green
pedestrian
have
This
empowers
tool
cross
blackout
through
associated
period
and
to
no
contain
schemes
only
safety
the
programme
been
(SCOOT)
includes:
Pedestrians
safely
(TADS)
concerns
we
by
pedestrian
Man
to
blackout
the
and
time
the
standard
will
the
be
do
to to
our
period
patterns
increases
number
crossings
communities a
introduced
complete
time
further
allow
invitation
detected
not
not
when
DfT.
with
number
in
and
proactive
technology
with;
the
elements
be
plan
of
with
has
therefore
signal
for
more
The
collisions
any
the
crossing
of
drive
on
TLRN
reduced
or
London
to
in
sites
of
been
their
a
for
by
the
lack
green
is
the to
them
at of
4.5.9.
4.5.8.
4.5.7.
4.5.6.
4.5.5.
4.5.4.
•
As
As
Providing,
Pedestrian
We
It
Providing,
installation. existing
Countdown
part
The
Countdown
installation
installation;
determine
Countdown summer from
feasibility
compliance, them
they
of April
uncertainty
boroughs
TLRN
Pedestrian
signals).
Pedestrian
detailing
basis.
regularly
pedestrians
high
pedestrian
basis
crossings
DfT
is
invited
is
mentioned
outlined
all
do
not
now
of
green
meet
other
and
2014,
pedestrian
pedestrian
against
not
new at
that
intended
signals
to
part
2014.
many
By we
have
study assessed
SCOOT
to
above, by
where
whether
the
enter
man
delivery
of on
by
meets
infrastructure
when
we
Countdown
roll
demand
at
of
2016
cycling
above,
adopt
Countdown
and/or
do extend
this
the
October
the
crossings. October
criteria
Until
standard
had
a
out
locations
is
invitation
for
to
not
the
crossings
numbers.
breakdown
this
criteria
technology.
we
other
considerably
the
road
technology
be
we
Pedestrian
and
every
programmes
installed
each
have
the
and
it
carriageway
schemes
the
SCOOT
and
are
technology
for
design the
is
will
2014,
network
works
will
2014,
from
results
too
green
adjusted
design
on
across
the
exploring
works.
include
to
signal
sufficient
meets
time
and
double
in
continue
The
cross
early
a
Pedestrian
of
installation
around
at
a
criteria
London.
case a
Retrofitting and
are
b)
is
Countdown
allowed
man
timescale
of
more
all
meet
all
for breakdown
crossing
green
We
London.
still
such
the
school
and
could
Pedestrian
to
the
these
by
period
carried
traffic
signal
sites
its
time
any
by
invitation
plan
therefore
to
to
undergoing
200
Traffic
criteria
expensive
the
commence
number
programme
as
We
case
invitation
for
identify
be
include
new
trials
to
Countdown crossings
of
signals
which
is
modernisation.
roll-out These
to
in
SCOOT, minimum
out
Pedestrian
for
will pedestrians
applied.
enter
as
Pedestrian
the
London
more
Signal
basis.
or
of
for
to
at
are
SCOOT
standard
the
of
also
intend
time
suitable
updated
Pedestrian
all
than
cross
sites meet
to
locations
the
in
pedestrian
of on
the
crossing.
available
than
roll-out
of
or
traffic
audible
cross
London Engineers
To
be
safety
Pedestrian
would
street
during
carriageway.
at
future
installation
to
introducing
other
Countdown
which
the
period
strongly
carry
Countdown, technology;
400,
to
over
to
opportunities
install
signal
is
crass
signals
are
guidance
criteria reduce
trials,
of
divert
and
Countdown.
which
detailing similar
The
it
extended
Pedestrian
roughly
crossings
meet
200
out
is
on
Pedestrian
on
all
Pedestrian
facility
SCOOT.
encouraging
tactile
not
the
green
a
finishing
a
sites
subject
resource
the
a
equipment
pedestrians
criteria pedestrian
of
This
dedicated
in
case
for
areas
case
possible
We
road.
set
10
whether
a)
London,
signals
for
if
on
(550
operating
man
is
per
assess
As
out
by
by
the
to
with
the
for
All
in
away
case
of
cent
higher
period
by
case
late
to
as
to
are the
4.6.2.
4.6.1.
large
4.6.
We
4.5.11.
4.5.10.
recommend
•
•
vehicles •
We
As
Requiring
Recommendation
Lobbying
of
operators Ensuring
attainable
additional
all
indicators
a
Implementing demonstrate
bronze fitted
to
implemented
relevant
Bronze,
achieve
allowing
underway
and
pedestrians
safety,
PSAP
actively
We
benefits
Committee
action
works
audible
was
number
signalised
facilities
In
difference
the part
specific
currently
relevant
The
recognise
the
with included
vehicles
of
outline
to
as
in
including
against
Mayor’s
where
lobbying
European
signals
suppliers
of
of
us
our
the
ensure
that
who
such all
within
requirements enhanced
government
that
relation
a
safety by
and
GLAJTfL
sites
pedestrian
this
reqiñre
to
raising
to
minimum.
on
Work
the
FORS
contractors
at
January
FORS
the
the to
take
also
and
the
all
this
we
drivers
as
proposed
side
FORS
and
Your
vehicles
a
without
benefits
upgrade,
the
all
standards.
the
pedestrian
current
two
fuel
(those
Mayor
operation.
anticipate
6
Related
Commission.
drivers.
as
to
this
need on
all
Gold
those
contracts
streets
tactile
safety
Gold
improved
Dif
Accessible
pedestrians
being
fleet
year
are
crossings
We
new
efficiency
Bronze
2015;
in
for
set
these
to
operating
of
on
and
standard
action
lobbying their
which
by
working
remaining
trained
by
are
paving.
features.
and
areas
Road the
down
period
provide
these
over
a
These
a
that
2016
Spring
crossings
fleets
safety
TfL
currently
facilities
and
number
design
recommendations.
transfer
contracted
to
Activity
before
in
turning
block
Transport
they
Risk
by
of
on
safety
and
take
activity
would
inform
As
Silver
by: London
vehicles
include
on
two
by
to
activity.
FORS
These 2016,
sites
issue
vulnerable
will
and
of
(WRRR)
be
are
GLAR7L
of
2016;
to
pedestrian
action
years
exploring
being
on
vehicles.
of
requirements
April2014
are
level.
areas
require
a
accredited
develop
172
will
that
operation
for
fleets
not
the
powers
accreditation
to
Gold
both Network
lobby
road
as
fitted
worth
include
be
awarded
pedestrians
and
necessarily
we
remaining
to
part
contract
to
At
road
infrastructure
these
are to risk
completed
significant
improve
introducing
position.
Actions
We
are
help
over
continue
FORS
be
with
crossings. we
of
to
of
document,
therefore
of
to
requirements
user
rotating
will
the
engaged
and
data
accredited
ilL
actions
HGVs
improve
Gold,
have
the
FORS
requirements,
to
audio
276
Gold,
assess
contract)
18
safety and
related
We
to
how
at
the
course
on
with
additional
by
reduced
and
a
Many
take
least
and
cones
(six
Silver
not
is
welcome
are
key
safety
2015/1
new
and
they operators
in
projects
a
pedestrian
a
already
and
the
to
commitment
19
with
to percent
necessarily
priority
programme
enforcement
already
of
are
performance
FORS
must
of
target
tactile
FORS
the
and/or
have
by
in
the
costs
vehicles
the
the
6.
costs
record
the
all
currently
the
2016.
the
safety
adhere
plan,
to
for
of)
made
for
DfF
and
to
of of
4.6.7.
4.6.6.
4.6.5.
4.6.4.
4.6.3.
•
•
Requiring The
Also
Bus
The
We
Reporting
provide
the Assistance
London
driving
acceleration
vehicles
incident driving
company,
information
of vehicle
the
cameras
be
significant
for
appropriate
the
timeframe,
the
manual
designed
effort
right
traffic
data
traffic
PSAP
noted
take
operators
monitoring
role
iBus
time
it
recording.
speed
places
is
to
goes
standards.
standards.
signal
monitoring
at
of
not
bus
investigations,
interpretation
copies
which
monitor
signals,
of
system
that
that
bus/subcontracted
also
to
almost
all
this
to
investment
of
writing,
(ISA)
this
currently
recorded into
data
driver
at
data.
help
times.
a
also
the
show
this
technology
commits
speed compliance;
In
the
provide
vehicle
only
selecting,
of
is
and
technology
light
recorded
Assembly,
all
us
the
is
have
Operators
standards
not
right
systems.
investigations
Many
no
the
not
will
provides
manage
possible
will
this
compliance
performance
of
to
system
in
designed
by
training,
varying
driver
us
an
times.
a
provide
this
understand
infrastructure
vary
operators
has
design
looking
training
in
to
through
important
ensuring On-bus
on the
are
undertaking
and
fleet
by
view
an
based to
been
exists
Whilst
fleet
sources
and
buses
some
to
monitor
current
average October
known
feature,
in
performance
at
and
operations,
from
of monitor
the
currently
used
operators
a
of
the
often
that
CCIV
the
on
role
it
collisions
that
proactive
form
in
and
monitoring
bus
system.
is
of
the
within
distance
to
iBus
conditions
traffic
2015.
intelligently
in
to
possible
an but
speed
as
2014,
bus
buses
use
technical
drivers
cameras
incident
drivers
system
of
play
fit
on-street
part
system
often
vehicle
ensuring
the
related
signal
such
within
telematic very
This
manner
on
and
in
involving
comply
covered
of
drivers
vehicle.
to
or
a
monitoring
and
installed
in
the
seriously
investigations,
initiatives
will
systems
do
upgrades
links
gain
benefit any
is
driving
compliance
speed,
data,
Greater
trial
relation
not
that
situation
scope
often
help
due
with
systems
report
and
an
within
traffic
of
an
their
Although
buses
of
to
by
standards.
us
approximation
Intelligent
the
as braking
provide
and
driving
to
appropriate
performance
to
London forward
the
for
to
the
would
to
signalling
part
a
promote
at
vehicles;
speed
vehicles.
without
to
speeding
significant
certain
understand
get
using
lack
but
operating
the
their
of
standards.
the
and
coverage
require
to
it
facing
time
their
of
Speed
to
It
limit
should
the
type
iBus
better
is
with
tool
At
and
of
of
and
in of
strategy
4.7.
4.6.12.
We
4.6.11.
4.6.10.
4.6.9.
4.6.8.
recommend
Recommendation
Ensuring
For
they
maintain operators
Our
strong.
existing
into
safety We
been It
posed
place,
new TfL.
operators
management
carrying
extensive
quality
deemed
We
seek
performance
companies
facilitate
network full
and findings
remain through
variety
copies
buses
reported
irrespective
for reports
incidents
is
more
already
have
safety
contracts
and
already
will
traffic
bus
taken
deemed
assurance
performance.
differ
including
We
monitoring;
operating
of
of
safety
as
continue
thorough
and
the
out
to
to
contracts, as
that
undertaken
serious
the
considered
that
to
incidents
driver
and
to
investigation
reported
assurance
steps
open
therefore
law
a
be
a
a
widely
have
ensure
of
highest
in
statistical
us
of
sharing
fatality.
the
contractual
whole,
in systems
possible
all
as
a
indicators
requirements
risk
preventing
the
enforcement
via
those
a
training
robust
that
cases
to
incidents,
to
new
on
safe
Mayor
a
7 investigation
manner
engineering
for
assessments
severity
but
on
a
prevent incidents,
range
high
be
possible
Bus
nearly
concentrate
by
operators and
introducing of
bespoke
and
outlined
individual
and
as
an
and
analysis.
developed
to
believe
until
incident
reports
key
the
requirements;
standards
and
routes
this
requirement
reasonably
incorporate
annual
of
monitoring
to
that
arrangements renewed
we
pedestrian
800
findings operator.
a
of
we
contained
safety
monitor
standards.
similar
is
which
TfL
across
the
reporting
would
will
above,
that
of
are to
quality
are
an
reporting
have
routes,
Collision
routes
specific
on
basis.
on
the
work
us
incident
in
actively
ongoing
undertaking
performance
the
are
satisfied
can
every
between
order
minimising
for
incident
bus
practicable.
systems
lead different
These
incident,
meaningful
London,
and
that
lead
monitoring;
within
the
safety
maintained
this
across
KSIs.
Operators
with
system,
all
range
safety
system
incidents
contracts
when
to
bus
to
or
all
improve
scrutinise
fitting
to
incidents
generates
process
more
that
reduced
the
learn
blame.
re-occurring.
bus bus
bus
more
performance
characteristics
are
identified
route;
the
from
including:
their
performance
safety
assessing
which
measures
police
the
of
between
safety
This
contracts
operators
operators
in-depth
under
are
annual
from
network.
across
of
meaningful
CCTV
a
the
that
contain
With
due
operations
operator
any
assessment
KSIs.
all
knocked
not
a
includes
risks,
is
best
performance
safety
to
large
areas
types
constant
is
to
then
investigation
approximately
safety
required
on
the
bus
tenders
We
develop
shown
investigations
measures
in
the
are
Therefore
and
report
We
and
practice
specific
indicators
and
all
place
has
number
network.
used
of
are
assist
operators
wing
improvements
record
covert
volume
sufficiently
in
feel
vehicles;
across
audits;
work
improvement
the
of
review
to
conducted
a
the
reported
from
to
in
to
a
manner
safety
mirror,
that
work
and
and
indicators
risks provide
already
detailed
order
driver
it
with
of
details
generate
and
of
and
into
the
has
8000
and
the
and
will
to
the bus
well.
the
to
all
to
not
a
of
in
to us, 4.7.3. 4.7.2. 4.7.1. 4.7.2. 4.7.1. ‘Installing a TfL We We We Producing We been safer. thereby Conducting to ability effective Further, enforcement. locations We an speeding greatly with shown will development seriously referenced MPS designed phone publish offences working during attendees enforcement roads. RoadPeace, of safety the road ensure already believe, are important will representatives have are result key upgraded identified activities safety. to working work We and issues increase further use currently they an the monitor agencies way and established safety identified in injured that to in affecting installs annual and have annual are here post new areas in and a result a means The would will to stages provides related camera reduction in review conjunction digital with that enhancing in also the reduce the cameras agreed operation. by greater speeding digital speeding; work on undertaking partnership RSSG safety across of KSI in plans with from evidence contribute a the reviewing pedestrians, reduce capacity London’s of concern but a a activities versions serious technology of to a reduction reducing reduction Road cameras Transport casualties a that the in cameras detail. forum has it evaluate the for serious London the at vehicles is with offences MPS, deaths information strongly likely a all Safety traffic effectiveness of with casualty through analysis ability to roads. the by and number for The the the the KSIs. KSl that plan. in 2016. casualty with on Committee. is effectiveness the the including is discussion City to for Roads the on MPS which Enforcement law Steering sites and up of demonstrated reduction. The TLRN identify monitor supports the MPS effectiveness This issues/concerns that Our history. an the these of number of to This enforcement sharing serious to London aim sub-groups, interest use date, where and contribute green history commitment will plan to and enforce of programme a systems red Group red around of of replace TfL allow the Transport number current The of with of borough will the fixed is phase light light Sub-Group, TfL’s that injuries, Police, and vulnerable will Operation view important by against of plan outline plan (RSSG) potential the to ongoing to consider justifies cameras offences the existing jumping, role exploring police that of to analysis traffic KSIs, that at to MPS make is of roads TfL, will Policing interventions be upgrade traffic safety to by still planned target investment speeding safety that be activity to raised. road Safeway, play additional including which Sustrans to and January wet a law the in the which also and partnership to particular new better signals, driver has cameras brings the Command in specific users film roads outline planned enforcement; cameras programme installation speed have activities is All improving on camera. already vehicles. have made target cameras will which those both and mobile 2015. London’s together killed even the all as road gun are to up an or
4.8.4.
4.8.3.
4.8.2.
4.8.1.
4.8.
traffic
The
•
Mayor
•
We
Supporting
We
Undertaking
We
Publishing,
We
Ensuring
variety develop
focused Recommendation
offences
different
interventions
University
outcomes Action
confiscation of
expenditure
Crown
in
government’s pedestrian
magistrates,
vulnerable
prosecution MPS
with
However
possible
following
for
the
back
statistics.
history. of
the
pedestrian
continue
will
welcome
welcome
cameras
drivers
possibility
and
the
Roads
to
PSAP
work
of
Plan
Prosecution
future
on
the
enforcement
MPS
to
moving
TfL
that
we
the
that
of
such
We
a
road
crime
to
comment
with
to
on
Transport
KSls;
who
and
and
this
research
outlines
at
Cambridge,
the
the
and
and
review will
should
road
conclusion
to
work
aim
on
endanger
will
Reform
research
road
of
new
an
as
users
the
tackle
suggestion
Crown
priorities
suggestion
conviction
continue
Transport
traffic
this. including
kill
on
to
work
to
driving annual
traffic
8
in
Service
sites
provide
crime
London
the
of
improve
or
how
work
in
activities.
conjunction
Whilst
the
Committee
resulting
into
offences.
dangerous with
the
Prosecution
to seriously
detail
transport
incidents
of
to
life
which
we
as
bans.
to
Criminal
investigate
basis,
is
road
discussions
with
role
outcomes
the
undertake
Policing
and
evidence
the
from on
Criminal
work
this
outlined
will
included
intend
the
on
ensuring
This
criminal
in
have
crime
the
RSSG
of
the
the
is
transparency not
the
the
network. with
fatal
with
in
and
injure
driving
Justice
in
and
police
to
Command
due
work Service police
best
been
Committee
Justice
be
prosecution
in
for
the
the
for
in
research
work
educational
the
encouraging
and
in
Enforcement
with
‘Transforming
careless
justice
MPS
that
tolerated
course
what
pedestrians;
drivers
early
impact
way Met
looks
to
MPS
System’.
identified
We
bans,
serious
to
with
the
and
encourage
road
System
crime
works.
send
crime
in
will stages
to
of
into
to
Traffic
on
MPS
system
involved
Coroners,
which
and
of the
improve
fines
driving.
CJS crime
identify
work
by:
institutions,
and
this
injuries.
enforcement
greater
the
statistics.
In
a
with
Sub-Group
Police,
statistics;
work
(CJS)
Previous
Performance
the of
clear
addition
Criminal
performance,
to
recommendation
and
effectiveness
conviction
closely
greater
is
development
experience
a
in
publish
effective
CJS
the
is
included
serious
Magistrates
use
including
collisions
to
message
vehicle
already
We
visibility
support
including
research -
to
with
Justice
of
understanding
to
A
activities
this
this,
will
disposal
Strategy
investigate
casualty
Team.
outcomes
in
the
underway
Coroners,
of
of
data.
with
report
Met
Action
it
of
that
the
the
Unit
MPS the
is
has
on
not
crime
road
and
and
a
27 to