Recurring concern
Inadequate control of pedestrian crossing risks
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 5 Aug 2013•Latest report 8 Jun 2026
What this concern includes
Includes crossing provision, siting, visibility, signals, markings, refuge, warnings and speed controls when the source ties them directly to pedestrian crossing safety.
Not included
- General pedestrian-and-vehicle separation away from a crossing
- Road hazards that do not concern pedestrian crossing safety
- Reports
- 71
- Individual concerns
- 113
- Date range
- 2013–2026
- Stated actions
- 136
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of physical barriers preventing unsafe pedestrian crossings at the 'Keep Clear' point
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Do not reinstate the Keep Clear road marking at the Ball Haye Street and Fountain Street junction.
Stated by Staffordshire County Council -
Action
Install a short section of guardrail around the northern radius of the Fountain Street junction.
Stated by Staffordshire County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of warning signs for pedestrians and motorists approaching the crossing
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Absence of a pedestrian crossing on the south side of a roundabout serving large residential areas
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of a pedestrian crossing at or near Ramshead Approach in Leeds
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
-
Action
Confirm the final layout for safe pedestrian-assisted facilities at the Ramshead Approach and Coal Road junctions.
Stated by Leeds City Council -
Action
Present a Highways Board report to seek formal funding approval for the Ramshead Approach junction improvement measures.
Stated by Leeds City Council -
Action
Issue the junction improvement scheme to contractors and complete onsite construction between May and June 2016.
Stated by Leeds City Council
-
Concerns raised1
Unsafe pedestrian crossings of the traffic island and central reservation
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised2
Insufficient pedestrian crossing time at the Deansgate and Knowsley Street junction
Failure to restrict pedestrians to the pedestrian crossing where drivers have a restricted view
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
-
Action
Request Transport for Greater Manchester’s Traffic Control Unit to review the pedestrian crossing timings and assess extending the green-man phase.
Stated by Bolton Borough Council -
Action
Review the Deansgate and Knowsley Street junction, including its geometry, pedestrian crossing arrangements, guard-rail provision and relevant safety evidence.
Stated by Bolton Borough Council -
Action
Investigate the suitability of zig-zag markings at the pedestrian crossing approaches.
Stated by Bolton Borough Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
-
Position
Transport for Greater Manchester’s Traffic Control Unit is responsible for signal installation and operation, including reviewing pedestrian crossing timings.
Stated by Bolton Borough Council
-
Position
A blind-spot mirror is considered unsuitable because different vehicles have different blind-spot positions and no suitable location is available.
Stated by Bolton Borough Council -
Position
Pedestrian guardrails are not considered necessary because assessment under national guidance found they were unlikely to improve correct crossing use.
Stated by Bolton Borough Council
-
Concerns raised1
Unsafe positioning of the pedestrian crossing adjacent to the mini roundabout
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Inadequate signage giving pedestrians guidance on safe crossing points
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Erect an additional sign identifying the pedestrian route and destination at the top of the steps.
Stated by Gateshead Borough Council -
Action
Investigate whether pedestrian routes are appropriately signed on both sides of the bridgehead.
Stated by Gateshead Borough Council
-
Concerns raised2
Poor lighting at the foot crossing
Inadequate warning signage at the foot crossing
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Unsafe positioning of a crossing on the apex of a sharp bend
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Review the crossing site and assess options for improving its safety and conspicuity.
Stated by Coventry City Council -
Action
Enhance zebra-crossing conspicuity by managing vegetation and street furniture, realigning the crossing, and installing additional illuminated Belisha beacon equipment.
Stated by Coventry City Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The Council does not propose relocating the crossing because relocation could reduce visibility, disrupt bus services, or encourage unprotected pedestrian crossings.
Stated by Coventry City Council
Data last updated 7 September 2026