|
||
| About DPTAC | Publications | Site Map | Links | Home
|
Response to: London Mayor's transport strategy - draft for public consultation'Introduction1. The Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the 'Mayor's transport strategy - Draft for Public Consultation'. 2. Section 142 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 requires the Mayor to consult DPTAC on the draft strategy and to include in the strategy 'proposals for the provision of transport which is accessible to persons with mobility problems' and 'to specify a timetable for the implementation of proposals'. 3. DPTAC has identified four overarching principles on which to base its advice to Government, other organisations and disabled people. Those principles are that:
4. These principles are the basis of DPTAC's response to the Mayor's draft transport strategy. DPTAC believes the strategy should deliver an accessible and inclusive transport system in London that benefits everyone. Background5. In response to the 'Mayor's Draft strategy - Assembly and Functional Bodies Consultation Draft, published in Autumn 2000', DPTAC made 34 recommendations in December 2000. 6. DPTAC has considered how each of these recommendations has been addressed in the formal consultation draft of the strategy, and has sought clarification from the GLA. The recommendations and DPTAC's understanding on whether they will be accepted and reflected in the final version of the strategy is summarised in Annex 1. 7. The following section summarises the key themes and issues in DPTAC's recommendations which are considered necessary to ensure the Mayor's transport strategy provides meaningful 'proposals for the provision of transport which is accessible to persons with mobility problems' and demonstrates a commitment to develop an inclusive and accessible transport system. 8. Many of the themes apply across the strategy and across different transport modes. Specific recommendations are contained in Annex 1. 9. In responding to the Mayor's draft strategy, DPTAC has taken a conscious decision to concentrate on high-level themes. This reflects DPTAC's status as a national organisation. Disabled Londoners and their local organisations will be best placed to identify how these themes relate to their local circumstances and priorities. 10. DPTAC hopes that by addressing these themes, and the recommendations, the Mayor's transport strategy will lay the foundations and framework necessary to make London's transport system accessible and inclusive for everyone. Theme 1: A clear vision of accessibility for disabled people.Relevant DPTAC recommendation: 111. The Mayor's transport strategy needs to set out a clear vision of what an accessible transport system, inclusive of the needs of disabled people, means in practice. 12. The Mayor already recognises the 'enormous scope and opportunity to improve transport accessibility' and the fact that it will require a strong commitment to ensure it is delivered. 13. DPTAC believes that the need for - and benefit from - an accessible transport system should be given a higher profile in the strategy - not hidden in the Accessible Transport Chapter. It also needs to be clearly defined. 14. Accessibility for disabled people is about more than improving access to a full range of jobs, services and facilities. It includes ensuring the removal of all unnecessary barriers to disabled people, be they physical (street, infrastructure and vehicle design), attitudinal or communication barriers. 15. An accessible transport system is one where everyone has the opportunity for independent mobility by being able to use the full range of transport services in London. 16. 'Accessibility' is a term that is interpreted differently by different audiences. Within the draft strategy the term 'accessible' is used in a variety of different contexts, not all related to disabled people. DPTAC has therefore stressed the need for accessibility for disabled people to be explicitly and consistently expressed as such throughout the strategy. 17. DPTAC welcomes the recognition that 'persons with mobility problems' includes a wide range of people - including people with physical, sensory or learning disabilities, those with physical and mental health problems, and people travelling with children or simply encumbered with heavy luggage or shopping - and the observation that they are not a homogenous group with identical needs. DPTAC advice is that this terminology should be used appropriately and consistently throughout the strategy. 18. The strategy recognises that the barriers facing people with mobility problems may be created by the transport system and the way it is operated. DPTAC welcomes this, but recommends that the strategy should spell out that accessible transport is transport that meets the needs of all these people and that barriers may be physical, attitudinal or communication based. Theme 2: Accessibility for disabled people as a condition of investment.Relevant DPTAC recommendations: 3, 5, 6, 13, 14, 15, 17, 21, 23, 25, 26. 19. The Government's ten-year plan for transport, Transport 2010 stated;
20. DPTAC very much hopes that the Mayor will match the Government's commitment. DPTAC recommends that the Mayor requires Transport for London (TfL) to demonstrate in detailed business and action plans - for the services under its control - how accessibility for disabled people will be improved. This should be a condition for approval of the plans and be specified in contracts relating to the provision of transport services in London. 21. The Mayor also has an important role in approving Local Implementation Plans (LIPs) of the Borough Councils and the City of London, which will have a major influence over the transport system. The LIPs are likely to include the planning, provision and maintenance of local infrastructure and facilities that are fundamental to accessible transport - for example 95% of London's streets. DPTAC recommends that the Mayor should require LIPs to demonstrate how they will improve accessibility for those with mobility problems, and set a timescale for the implementation of those proposals, in the same way that the GLA Act requires them in respect of the Mayor's strategy. 22. Investment in people is also necessary. All staff, including those who plan, provide, manage and operate services in TfL, other operators and the London local authorities will benefit from mandatory Disability Equality and Customer Care accredited training. 23. Training is relevant to everyone involved with transport in London from the boardroom to the front line of service provision. There is a need for all staff, not just those dealing with the public, to understand the relevance of their work to access issues for disabled people. 24. To be effective, training itself must be relevant to the job, of high quality and on-going. The strategy will need to make education and on-going training for all staff a key element of relevant business plans and encourage others to invest in training as well. Theme 3: Accessibility is relevant to everyone.Relevant DPTAC recommendations: 2, 4, 9, 19, 20. 25. There are approximately 770 000 disabled people in London - 17% of the population. But nearly everyone benefits from accessibility. 26. Where transport systems accessible to disabled people are in place the transport operator also benefits. Making transport easier and more convenient for everyone helps generate additional journeys, for example by improving the efficiency of boarding and alighting from public transport. 27. It will be essential to incorporate accessibility for disabled people in the criteria, specification and contracts for the design, provision, operation, maintenance and management of any transport service and infrastructure, including the pedestrian environment. 28. There are excellent publications, guidelines and practitioners specialised in access for disabled people, as well as disabled people themselves, who can advise on issues, priorities and solutions. 29. There are also specific regulations and requirements that set out the minimum standards for accessibility for disabled people, for example on bus and rolling stock design. Transport for London must meet these minimum requirements in full and should seek improvements where possible, including accelerating the introduction of accessible services. 30. It is essential that the Mayor monitors and reviews access in policies, procedures and practices to maintain an inclusive environment at all times. This could be an important role for the Accessibility/Mobility Forums. 31. Building in accessibility for disabled people to new and existing transport services and facilities will enable more disabled people to travel in mainstream services, thereby reducing pressure on specialised services, such as Dial-a-Ride. In turn, this will enable those essential services to improve the quality of service they provide for more severely disabled Londoners. 32. Some disabled people will always be dependent on private vehicles for their independent mobility and must not be excluded or penalised in any way because of this. Theme 4: Accessibility should be based on users needs.Relevant DPTAC recommendations: 7, 8, 13, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33. 33. DPTAC welcomes the proposals to establish Accessibility/Mobility Forums as one means of ensuring that disabled people have a voice. 34. To be effective forums for consultation and representation, DPTAC consider it essential that the Accessibility/Mobility Forums have clear terms of reference and the resources required to fulfil their role. 35. Accessibility and Mobility Forums will need to ensure the involvement of all disabled people, including the needs of those disabled people unable to travel at present. Existing organisations in London should be encouraged to promote membership of the Forums among those people they represent. 36. The need for accessibility starts from the front door. It is not just the Underground and bus vehicles that need to be accessible. To be effective in meeting the needs of disabled people there is a need to secure comprehensive improvements at a local level, for example to the street environment, parking arrangements, personal safety and the walking environment where people live. 37. To make a real difference to the vast majority of people small scale improvements to basic facilities are required. The proposed Accessibility and Mobility Forums are ideally placed to advise on the priorities at a neighbourhood level. 38. Accessibility standards, criteria and research should be based on users needs. If accessibility is to be successful it will need to take into account the needs of the people it is aiming to serve. DETR will shortly be publishing 'Inclusive Mobility' with guidelines on pedestrian and transport infrastructure. This will include much useful information that will have to be taken into account when designing and implementing accessible systems. 39. As an example, 400m is often used for planning bus routes to ensure they are 'accessible' but this does not take into account the limited mobility range of many disabled people. The DETR guide mentioned above contains guidance on walking distances showing how many people cannot walk this far.
40. Private cars are an essential and irreplaceable means of mobility for many disabled people and will remain so for some irrespective of any accessibility improvements in public transport. 41. The Blue/Orange badge system provides a crucially important national arrangement for parking concessions, with reciprocal arrangements in European countries. In central London, contrary to what is stated in the draft strategy, there are four separate and distinct schemes offering a variety of parking concessions for disabled people. Removing the inconsistencies between these schemes and bringing them into line with arrangements outside London should be an immediate priority for the Mayor to deliver a unified parking concession scheme across the capital. 42. DPTAC has serious reservations about the feasibility of developing a 'Silver Badge' scheme for disabled people to provide exemption from congestion charging. The difficulties of assessing disabled claimants, assuring their eligibility and policing their behaviour will be identical to those of the Blue/Orange Badge Scheme and can hardly justify the additional cost. Moreover, any new scheme risks recreating the abuses of the Blue/Orange Badge Scheme and adding to confusion over eligibility. The value for money of any new scheme is therefore questionable. 43. DPTAC acknowledges the issue of identifying Blue/Orange Badge holders not travelling in their own registered vehicles but urges the Mayor to consult DPTAC and other disability organisations on his proposed solution. 44. DPTAC welcomes the strategy's recognition of the 'clear need to harmonise the inconsistent parking policies of the boroughs and the authorities surrounding London'. DPTAC believes that any harmonisation should be geared towards meeting the needs of disabled motorists. 45. The development of maximum parking standards for private non-residential parking (PNR), as advocated in national planning policy, needs to accommodate the essential provision of a minimum level of accessible parking places for disabled motorists duly displaying the Blue/Orange Badge. 46. On this and other issues, the Spatial Development strategy will need to be consistent in ensuring that the approach delivers accessibility for disabled people. Summary47. DPTAC welcomes the Mayor's Draft transport strategy and the measures it contains to improve accessibility for disabled people. DPTAC understands that the final strategy will address the majority of the recommendations made in Annex 1. 48. DPTAC believes this is essential to ensure that the strategy lays the foundation for an accessible and inclusive transport system of which all Londoners can be proud. Annex 1:
|
| Recommendation No. | In draft strategy? | Further comment |
| 1: Include an overriding transport objective (under maximising accessibility in section D) that aims to 'provide everyone with the opportunity for independent mobility through ensuring that the full range of transport services are accessible to persons with mobility problems' | Partially | DPTAC believes it is essential for the
Mayor, GLA and TfL to have a clear understanding of the meaning of
accessibility and disabled people.
Within the strategy there are several references to accessibility in different contexts. Accessibility for disabled people needs to be explicitly covered and should encompass the physical, communication and attitudinal barriers that affect independent mobility. An accessible transport system is one where everyone has the opportunity for independent mobility by being able to use the full range of transport services in London. There are still many people who do not recognise the broad range of disabled people and how the transport system can impact on their independent mobility. DPTAC would be pleased to offer GLA further advice on this point. |
| 2: The benefits of improving the accessibility of all transport services to everyone should be stressed, including the benefits to operators. | Yes | In page 227, it states "of course,
most improvements in accessibility will benefit everyone. They also
provide benefits for the transport operator by, for example, improving
the efficiency of boarding and alighting and so encouraging greater
use".
DPTAC welcomes the inclusion of this statement although it should be more clearly stressed earlier in the strategy in its overall aims, not just in the section relating to accessibility for disabled people. |
| 3: Include a new policy taking forward the Government's commitment in Transport 2010, stating 'building in accessibility for disabled people will be a condition of public money being spent in all new investment'. | No | GLA have indicated that they agree in
principle but are concerned that access for disabled people should
not be a reason to delay investment in other areas where accessibility
is not a factor, such as signalling.
While noting their concern, DPTAC believes it is essential for all public authorities approving money to make a pledge to take forward the Government's commitment on accessibility for disabled people. This will include developing systems to ensure every opportunity to improve accessibility for disabled people is utilised.
|
| 4: The strategy should encourage the Mayor to work in partnership with any organisation with relevant experience and knowledge that can help improve the accessibility of transport services. It should also encourage the Mayor to require other public bodies, e.g. health and local authorities, having an impact on travel demand and behaviour, to consider the implications of any changes in location of services on access for disabled people and, in developing the London Borough's Local Implementation Plans, to provide appropriate solutions for disabled people. . | Possibly under Proposal 4O.3 | GLA indicated that they will work with
a range of partners and develop accessibility/mobility forums.
DPTAC stressed the need to develop partnerships with all relevant organisations and people to improve accessibility. The GLA will need to involve local people to identify local problems - and use agreed national standards and recognised access consultants - so as to not reinvent solutions already available elsewhere. |
| 5: A revised policy on staff training should be included in the strategy requiring 'disability equality training relevant to the job function for all staff and management involved in the provision and planning of transport services in London'. This should apply to those involved in the full range of transport services, including taxi and private hire vehicles. | Possibly under Proposal 4O.1 | DPTAC has welcomed the proposal 4O.1 to
make disability equality training mandatory for all staff - from boardroom
to frontline - who provide and plan transport services under Transport
for London's control.
However, DPTAC suggested this is amended to explicitly include the operation and management of services and that the GLA and TfL use their influence to promote disability equality training, for example in guidance on Local Implementation Plans and in Guidance to the Strategic Rail Authority. |
| 6: Rather than develop new accessibility standards, the Mayor should seek to ensure the implementation of existing accessibility standards through briefs and contracts that penalise the failure to deliver transport services accessible to disabled people. | Possibly under Proposal 4O.2 | GLA have indicated that they will take
on board existing good practice in providing accessibility for disabled
people. If necessary these will be improved for use in London. However,
it is not for the strategy to seek to penalise failure to adhere to
these standards but for provisions to be built into the business plans
and contracts of TfL and guidance to other authorities to ensure their
delivery. DPTAC welcomes this proposal to learn from existing good
practice and improve where necessary.
|
| 7: Accessibility/Mobility Forums must be representative of all persons with mobility problems, as defined in the strategy, and are supplementary to, not replacements for national guidance, established technical research and the expert evaluation of solutions. | No | GLA have reassured DPTAC that the Accessibility/Mobility
Forums will be representative of all disabled people and not a replacement
for agreed standards.
DPTAC believes the existing organisations in London concerned with accessibility should work together to ensure Accessibility/Mobility Forums are representative and have a clear function that takes full account of established truths. |
| 8: The Mayor's strategy should consider providing resources to facilitate and support the development of Accessibility/Mobility Forums through the recruitment of access officers, with appropriate skills and experience, in each Borough. | No | GLA wish to facilitate the Accessibility/Mobility
Forums and will expect TfL staff and operators to be involved. However,
individual Boroughs will be expected to provide local access officers.
DPTAC agrees it the each Boroughs responsibility to have the staff, but believes that each Borough should be encouraged to have - or develop - the expertise and resources in this accessibility for disabled people to ensure that the Accessibility/Mobility Forums are effective. |
| 9: The Mayor should require Transport for London to develop a comprehensive information policy that ensures that all Londoners and visitors can easily find out the best travel option for their needs, including accessible information on the full range of transport services (including accessible transport services) both before undertaking and during journeys. | Yes, included in Proposal 4O.5 | GLA have included a proposal for comprehensive
information in a range of formats to be provided by Transport for
London on all public transport services, including the full range
of accessible services, to enable people to plan and make journeys
easily.
DPTAC welcome the proposal but the need for accessible information during journeys - for example by audible and visual announcements on transport services - could be more explicit. This will not only help deaf and hard of hearing people but also large numbers of overseas tourists and others whose first language is not English. |
| 10: The proposal for increased provision of powered wheelchairs should be a more general and inclusive policy recommending the Mayor press for increased provision of mobility aids and services to aid the independent mobility of disabled people, working with the health authorities and the London Boroughs. | Yes. | Proposal 4O.6 addressed DPTAC's recommendation
that the Mayor press for the provision of mobility aids and services
that people require.
More emphasis in the commentary should be included on mobility aids for other disabled people, for example the provision by social services of mobility training. |
| 11: The parking concession scheme for disabled people in London should be consistent with the Blue/Orange badge scheme operated throughout the country. The four separate schemes in central London should be abolished. | No | GLA indicated agreement on the need to
urgently review the arrangements in central London.
DPTAC will continue to recommend that the parking concession scheme for disabled people in London should be consistent throughout the whole of the London area and beyond. |
| 12: The Mayor should abandon plans for a 'Silver Badge Scheme' as too costly and impractical and focus resources on the effective enforcement of the Blue/Orange Badge scheme as a basis for exemption from any congestion charging scheme. | No | GLA expressed concern that the problems
of the Blue Badge Scheme - and current review - were unlikely to be
resolved before the introduction of road user charging in London in
2003. They therefore wished to establish an independent Silver Badge
Scheme.
DPTAC remain unconvinced of TfL's ability to establish a scheme without recreating the problems of the Blue Badge Scheme and adding to the complications for disabled people dependent on private vehicles for their independent mobility. |
| 13: In developing guidance on parking standards, the Spatial Development Strategy should consider the needs for minimum levels of accessible parking in convenient locations, including all new developments. | No | GLA have indicated that minimum standards of accessible parking for disabled people will be addressed in the final strategy. |
| 14: The Mayor should use his influence to encourage higher levels of staffing throughout the transport system, delivering real improvements to the availability and quality of customer focus particularly for those with mobility problems. | Yes, related to Proposal 5.5 | DPTAC welcomes the longer term goal of increasing staff - included in page 76 - but notes that although addressing staffing levels could bring immediate benefits. |
| 15: The Mayor should require programmes of improvements by Transport for London and the Boroughs that deliver improvements in accessibility of the street environment in the first years of the strategy period. | Partially (page 315) | GLA have indicated that programmes of
improvements for main pedestrian routes should be identified in Local
Implementation Plans by the middle of 2002.
|
| 16: The Mayor should encourage consultation on local priorities at a neighbourhood level, enabling people to get from their front door (general origins) to the wider neighbourhood and transport services as well as key destinations. | Partially | DPTAC and GLA indicated that this could be an early issue for discussion on the local forums. |
| 17: Proposal 4F.10 should be amended to read, 'Transport for London will draw up a costed and timed plan for accelerating the introduction of Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations (PSVAR) compliant vehicles ahead of the timetable required under the Disability Discrimination Act. | Partially
(page 143) |
DPTAC welcomes the proposal to draw up
a costed and timed plan for accelerating the introduction of low,
floor accessible buses.
GLA have indicated agreement with DPTAC's advice that this should refer to the PSV accessibility regulations drawn up under the DDA. |
| 18: DPTAC strongly recommends that Routemaster vehicles are phased out by 2005/6. | No | Routemasters are closely identified with
an image of London. DPTAC strongly believes that the needs of Londoners
should take precedent over this image.
The Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations, developed under the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 - require all buses, both old and new, and single or double-deck, to comply by the year 1 January 2017. In practice, compliance with these dates is likely to be earlier in many cases and DPTAC's recommendation seeks to bring forward an accessible transport system earlier in London. |
| 19: Any new design resulting from a study of vehicles in London must take into account the DDA Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations (PSVAR) and meet the technical specifications they contain in full. An explanation of the requirements will be contained in the DETR document 'The Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 2000 Guidance'. | No | GLA have indicated that this recommendation will be addressed in the final strategy. |
| 20: The final strategy should publicise the location and criteria used in determining the core network of 'step-free' accessible stations. | No | GLA have indicated that the criteria for
determining the core network of 'step free' stations could be publicised
but that their location is yet to be determined.
DPTAC sees this as a potential role for the Accessibility/Mobility Forums to advise on. The opportunities to improve accessibility beyond step free provision should be addressed at all stations in compliance with DDA 2004 duties and SRA Code of Practice. |
| 21: The programme for modernising 80% of London Underground Stations by 2010 must be required to demonstrate how accessibility for disabled people is being built in, measured against design standards equivalent to the forthcoming ORR Code of Practice for national rail services. | No - specific target deleted from the public consultation draft. | The specific target for modernisation
of stations has been dropped. Modernisation does not necessarily mean
rebuilding stations, it could include minor works.
DPTAC continues to recommend that all programmes of works to London Underground Stations should be required to demonstrate how accessibility for disabled people will be included, measured against agreed and publicly available national design standards. |
| 22: London Underground and national rail services should also be encouraged to consider accessibility from the local catchment area and signage to stations. | No | The strategy includes proposals to ensure
everyone can benefit from the accessibility of the Docklands Light
Railway and Tramlink by making the surrounding street environment
and supporting services equally accessible.
DPTAC welcomes these proposals but believes they should apply to all transport services, particularly London Underground and national rail stations. |
| 23: Guidance and training for drivers should include coverage of how stopping arrangements and assistance can improve accessibility. | Yes, Proposal 4O.1 | GLA have indicated this recommendation
will be addressed in the preamble to Proposal 4O.1.
|
| 24: To help determine priorities in London, the report on travel behaviour of different social groups should also consider the aspirations, needs and behaviour of those disabled people who would travel if access barriers were removed. | Partially | GLA have indicated that it is their intention
to include non-travellers as well as travellers, although contacting
the former such people is sometimes difficult.
DPTAC believes this is a role in which organisations in London concerned with accessibility and the proposed Accessibility/Mobility Forums will be able to assist. in. |
| 25: Policy D6 requiring accessibility to be taken into account when determining locational decisions should include consideration of the limited mobility range of many disabled people. | No | GLA have conceded indicated that the need
for accessibility for disabled people could be more explicit in the
relevant section on taking account of access in locational and development
decisions.
DPTAC believes this is fundamental to creating an accessible London. Many disabled people are unable to travel more than 50m and some can only do so after a rest or with someone's help. Considering access in locational decisions is also important - for example in decisions to relocate heath and social services which are often made without due regard to how disabled people will be able to reach and use new facilities. |
| 26: Developers' contributions do not replace the standard requirement to build in accessibility and should add-value to a scheme. | Partially, relate to Policy 3.6 | GLA indicated that access for disabled
people will be a standard requirement of development not an additional
extra.
DPTAC believe the final strategy should make this more explicit. |
| 27: The needs of disabled people, including disabled motorists, should be incorporated into transport assessments proposed under Policy D9. | No | GLA indicated this would be addressed in the final strategy. DPTAC suggested expanding the advice. |
| 28: The extension of the Countdown system should incorporate audible and visual information at the earliest opportunity linked to proposal 4F.9. | No | GLA agreed to consider inclusion of audible Countdown systems in the proposal. |
| 29: Fixed staircases should be retained in all London Underground stations. | No | DPTAC recognise the conflict of interest
between access for disabled people, general capacity and the requirements
of other people.
However, escalators are not accessible to all disabled people, even when stationary, as their higher step heights make them they are harder to negotiate walk up. |
| 30: Priority should be given to providing accessible parking provision for disabled motorists where on-street parking opportunities are limited at both underground and national rail stations. | No | DPTAC understand this will be addressed in the final strategy. |
| 31: The Spatial Development strategy needs to take fully into account the needs of disabled people and understand the rationale behind access solutions. | No | DPTAC understand this will be addressed
referenced in the final text of the strategy, possibly in the linkages
to other strategies.
The Spatial Development strategy will need to ensure it acknowledges the fact that many disabled people cannot can not walk more than 50m unaidedand understands the implications of this for the planning of development and transport services. |
| 32: Proposals should include reference to the inclusion of the needs of disabled people in the partial pedestrianisation of Trafalgar Square, including the need for accessible parking for disabled motorists to ensure that all key buildings and open spaces remain accessible. | No | DPTAC has been making these recommendations
direct to the project team involved on the World Squares for All initiative.
All future proposals for pedestrianisation will also need to address provision for disabled people who are dependent on private vehicles for independent mobility. |
| 33: Proposals for Pedestrian Audits should include reference to the need for parking for disabled motorists. | No | As above, proposals will need to address
the needs of all disabled people, including those dependent on private
vehicles for independent mobility.
GLA have indicated that the strategy will include reference to parking for disabled people in the preamble to the proposal. |
| 34: Accessibility should be evaluated against current best practice, drawing on international and UK experience beyond the world cities. | Partially addressed | GLA indicated agreement that benchmarking, particularly for issues like accessibility for disabled people, should draw on a wider range of UK and international experience than the world cities of Tokyo, New York and Paris. |
A short life task group of DPTAC considered how the strategy should address accessibility for disabled people. The membership of this group included DPTAC members and observers from London organisations.
Members
Valerie Lang MBE - DPTAC London Task Group Chair
Jane Wilmot OBE - DPTAC Chair
Nick Tyler - DPTAC
Richard West - DPTAC
Sir Peter Large CBE - DPTAC
Bert Massie CBE - DPTAC
Peter Barker OBE - DPTAC
Observers
Pam Moffat - London Mobility Advisory Panel
Ron Brewer - London Transport Users Committee
Published: 12 June 2001