PFD report

Ozan Allen · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 1 Apr 2019•Inner North London

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
12

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Concerns raised4

  1. Lack of pedestrian guard railing at the junction
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate physical separation between pedestrians and vehicular traffic
  2. Failure of pedestrians to use staggered two-stage crossings as intended
  3. Impaired junction visibility from vehicles waiting to turn
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate visibility for road users at hazardous junctions
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.6

  1. Action

    Complete a collision study examining recent recorded collision history to inform further cycling and walking improvements.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  2. Action

    Reintroduce the Burdett Road right turn into Mile End Road and ban the corresponding Mile End Road left turn.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  3. Action

    Investigate A11 approach measures, including bus-stop changes and relocating the Mile End station crossing, to reduce queuing and blocking back.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 August 2019.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Internal pedestrian islands will be retained because removing them would reduce capacity, increase congestion, and create additional risks.

    Stated by Transport for LondonExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of pedestrian guard railing at the junction

Wider context from the report

“(2) There is no pedestrian guard railing at the junction ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate physical separation between pedestrians and vehicular traffic.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure of pedestrians to use staggered two-stage crossings as intended

Wider context from the report

“(4) There are staggered two-stage crossings in place to enable pedestrians to cross the road. The investigator from the Metropolitan Police’s Road Engineering Unit, ████████ observed that pedestrians often do not use the crossings as intended. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Impaired junction visibility from vehicles waiting to turn

Wider context from the report

“(3) Visibility of the junction can be impaired by vehicles waiting to turn. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate visibility for road users at hazardous junctions.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Pedestrian collision hazard near the junction

Wider context from the report

“(5) ████████ evidence was that in the three years to the end of 2017, there have been 36 reported personal injury collisions within 50 metres of the junction – 17 of which involved pedestrians. (6) In addition, ████████ informed me that a collision study undertaken by TfL has identified that whilst collisions involving cyclists had decreased since the introduction of Cycle Superhighway 2, the proportion of collisions involving pedestrians had increased. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate control of recurring collision risks at hazardous road locations; Inadequate safety controls at high-risk road junctions.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Complete a collision study examining recent recorded collision history to inform further cycling and walking improvements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The banned turns have been contentious with some local residents. The London Borough of Tower Hamlets has asked for these to be reviewed. In addition, as per your report, we acknowledge that monitoring of the changes made in 2016 shows that they have reduced the number of collisions affecting cyclists, but the number of collisions involving pedestrians has increased. This impact was not intended as part of that design. We sought to analyse reasons for this and commissioned a collision study that was completed in July 2018, prior to the death of Mr Allen, which involved a review of the recent recorded collision history. This informed a package of further proposals of cycling and walking improvements at this junction.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Reintroduce the Burdett Road right turn into Mile End Road and ban the corresponding Mile End Road left turn.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As outlined in our letter, we are proposing to re-introduce the right turn from Burdett Road (southern arm) to Mile End Road (eastern arm) but ban the corresponding left turn from Mile End Road (eastern arm) to Burdett Road (southern arm). This will allow us to decrease the overall wait times at the pedestrian crossings on all arms of the junction, as well as the adjacent staggered (two-part) crossing outside Mile End station that is co-ordinated with the operation of the junction.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Investigate A11 approach measures, including bus-stop changes and relocating the Mile End station crossing, to reduce queuing and blocking back.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are also proposing to introduce a reduced speed limit of 20mph on the A11 corridor between Bow and Aldgate through the junction, and we are investigating measures on the A11 Mile End Road approaches such as changes to bus stop facilities and relocating the crossing outside Mile End station to reduce the risk of traffic queuing and blocking back into the junction. We have yet to consult on these additional proposals but plan to complete both further projects by 2024 subject to funding, resources, consultation, roadspace co-ordination for build, and due process.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 3 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Implement segregated cycle lanes, pedestrian islands and turn restrictions through the junction upgrade.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As part of the upgrade of Cycle Superhighway 2 completed in 2016, changes were made at the junction including installing segregated cycle lanes on the Mile End Road approaches, and introducing a right turn ban from Mile End Road (western arm) into Burdett Road (southern arm) and a right turn ban from Burdett Road (southern arm) into Mile End Road (eastern arm). Prior to finalising this design, we considered straight-across crossing design options, but they were not feasible due to adverse impacts which included longer wait times for pedestrians, increased queue lengths for vehicles, and re-routing of traffic on local roads leading to ‘rat-running’.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 1 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Reintroduce pedestrian guard railing on the junction’s north-west corner to direct pedestrians to formal crossings.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are proposing to re-introduce pedestrian guard railing on north-west corner of the junction to direct pedestrians to use the formal crossings provided. We are also investigating signal heads on green pedestrian signals to reduce the risk of ‘see-through’ problems (where two or more signals are close together and there are risks that road users look at the wrong set of signals), and removal of street furniture such as telephone kiosks to improve pedestrian visibility (subject to discussions with third parties).”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Introduce a 20mph speed limit on the A11 corridor between Bow and Aldgate through the junction.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are also proposing to introduce a reduced speed limit of 20mph on the A11 corridor between Bow and Aldgate through the junction, and we are investigating measures on the A11 Mile End Road approaches such as changes to bus stop facilities and relocating the crossing outside Mile End station to reduce the risk of traffic queuing and blocking back into the junction. We have yet to consult on these additional proposals but plan to complete both further projects by 2024 subject to funding, resources, consultation, roadspace co-ordination for build, and due process.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 3 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Internal pedestrian islands will be retained because removing them would reduce capacity, increase congestion, and create additional risks.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As part of the upgrade of Cycle Superhighway 2 completed in 2016, changes were made at the junction including installing segregated cycle lanes on the Mile End Road approaches, and introducing a right turn ban from Mile End Road (western arm) into Burdett Road (southern arm) and a right turn ban from Burdett Road (southern arm) into Mile End Road (eastern arm). Prior to finalising this design, we considered straight-across crossing design options, but they were not feasible due to adverse impacts which included longer wait times for pedestrians, increased queue lengths for vehicles, and re-routing of traffic on local roads leading to ‘rat-running’.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 1 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.6

  1. 1

    Analyse consultation feedback and consider design adjustments in light of received comments.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  2. 2

    Publish the consultation report outlining next steps by October 2019.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  3. 3

    Continue monitoring the junction’s performance after the proposed changes.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  4. 4

    Investigate removing street furniture, including telephone kiosks, to improve pedestrian visibility.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  5. 5

    Conduct public consultation on proposed cycling and walking improvements affecting the junction.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 15 August 2019.
  6. 6

    Investigate green pedestrian signal heads to reduce risks from road users viewing the wrong signal.

    Stated by Transport for LondonStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 August 2019.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    Additional A11 safety projects depend on funding, resources, consultation, roadspace coordination, and due process.

    Stated by Transport for LondonUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Analyse consultation feedback and consider design adjustments in light of received comments.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are currently analysing the consultation feedback for this exercise and we are considering adjustments to the design in light of comments received. We are planning to publish our consultation report by October 2019 which will outline our next steps, and subject to the consultation outcome, funding and other approvals, construction could start in winter 2019/20 and complete by summer 2020. We will then continue to monitor the performance of this junction.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 3 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Publish the consultation report outlining next steps by October 2019.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are currently analysing the consultation feedback for this exercise and we are considering adjustments to the design in light of comments received. We are planning to publish our consultation report by October 2019 which will outline our next steps, and subject to the consultation outcome, funding and other approvals, construction could start in winter 2019/20 and complete by summer 2020. We will then continue to monitor the performance of this junction.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 3 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Continue monitoring the junction’s performance after the proposed changes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are currently analysing the consultation feedback for this exercise and we are considering adjustments to the design in light of comments received. We are planning to publish our consultation report by October 2019 which will outline our next steps, and subject to the consultation outcome, funding and other approvals, construction could start in winter 2019/20 and complete by summer 2020. We will then continue to monitor the performance of this junction.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 3 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Investigate removing street furniture, including telephone kiosks, to improve pedestrian visibility.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are proposing to re-introduce pedestrian guard railing on north-west corner of the junction to direct pedestrians to use the formal crossings provided. We are also investigating signal heads on green pedestrian signals to reduce the risk of ‘see-through’ problems (where two or more signals are close together and there are risks that road users look at the wrong set of signals), and removal of street furniture such as telephone kiosks to improve pedestrian visibility (subject to discussions with third parties).”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Conduct public consultation on proposed cycling and walking improvements affecting the junction.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We undertook a public consultation on our proposals which stretched between Hackney and the Isle of Dogs, including this junction, between the 9 May and 21 June 2019 and this can be found on our website at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/hackney-to-isle-of-dogs/”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Investigate green pedestrian signal heads to reduce risks from road users viewing the wrong signal.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are proposing to re-introduce pedestrian guard railing on north-west corner of the junction to direct pedestrians to use the formal crossings provided. We are also investigating signal heads on green pedestrian signals to reduce the risk of ‘see-through’ problems (where two or more signals are close together and there are risks that road users look at the wrong set of signals), and removal of street furniture such as telephone kiosks to improve pedestrian visibility (subject to discussions with third parties).”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Additional A11 safety projects depend on funding, resources, consultation, roadspace coordination, and due process.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We are also proposing to introduce a reduced speed limit of 20mph on the A11 corridor between Bow and Aldgate through the junction, and we are investigating measures on the A11 Mile End Road approaches such as changes to bus stop facilities and relocating the crossing outside Mile End station to reduce the risk of traffic queuing and blocking back into the junction. We have yet to consult on these additional proposals but plan to complete both further projects by 2024 subject to funding, resources, consultation, roadspace co-ordination for build, and due process.”

Source location

2019-0197-Response-by-Transport-for-London
Page 3 · response
Published 15 August 2019

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026