12008 Studio Walk...cloudy with light drizzle towards the end of the day. The results show Studio...

Summary Report issued on 07 December 2010 for The Royal Parks Agency

Kensington Gardens Studio Walk Shared Use Trial Monitoring

Atkins Intelligent SpaceEuston Tower286 Euston TowerLondon NW1 3AT

www.intelligentspace.comwww.atkinsglobal.com

This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for The Royal Parks Agency and use in relation to Kensington Gardens. Atkins assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents. Except for internal use, no part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Atkins.

Ordnance Survey®, OS MasterMap™, TOID™, Land-Line® and OSCAR® are trademarks or registered trademarks of Ordnance Survey, the national mapping agency of Great Britain. MapInfo® and MapInfo Professional® are registered trademarks of Mapinfo Corporation. Other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.This product includes map data licensed from Ordnance Survey with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Offi ce. ©Crown copyright 2009. All rights reserved.

Job Number 5097289 Copy No. - Document Ref. Kensington Gardens Studio Walk Shared Use Trial Monitoring

Job Name Studio Walk, Kensington Gardens

Printing A3 Double Sided

Issue Purpose of Issue Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date

1 Draft MT GS JL EF 08.10.2010

2 Final Report GS MT EF 07.12.2010

SSuuuummmmmaaaaarrrryyy RRRRReeeppppoooort for TThhhhe RRoyyyyyyaaaalll PPPaaarrrrkkkkssss AAAAgggeeennncccyyy0000777 DDDeeecccceeeemmmmbbbeeeerrrr 2222000011100

Executive Summary 5

Observation studies 18

Level of comfort assessment 25

4

Studio Walk Shared Use Trial Monitoring

513 December 2010

1 Executive Summary

6

The Broad Walk Shared Use Trial Monitoring

About Kensington GardensKensington Gardens covers 111 hectares in central London, offering popular visitor attractions such as Kensington Palace, the Albert Memorial, the Diana Memorial Playground and the Serpentine Gallery. The park is a useful resource for local residents, an important green space and a key attraction for tourists in London.

Kensington Gardens’ main points of access are:

• Black Lion Gate (North entrance);

• Studio Gate (West entrance);

• Palace Gate (South entrance);

• Mount Gate (East entrance).

The park is defi ned to the east by the Longwater and West Carriage Drive, which separate it from Hyde Park.

There are currently three permanent shared use routes in Kensington Gardens (see Figure 1):

• The Broad Walk – the main north-south route connecting Bayswater Road and Kensington Road, running east-west on the southern boundary of the Park.

• Mount Walk – a popular east-west route, connecting The Broad Walk with West Carriage Drive.

• Albert Approach Road – running from Queen’s Gate to West Carriage Drive.

Studio Walk is the continuation of Mount Walk to Studio Gate, the western entrance to the park.

Figure 1 Study area and context

Barclays Cycle Hire Docking StationsBandstand

ElfinOak

Diana Princess of Wales

Memorial Playground

The Orangery

AlbertMemorial

The Royal Albert Hall

SerpentineGallery

The Magazine

DianaMemorial Fountain

ItalianGardens

Queen Caroline's Temple

Peter Pan Statue

Speke's Monument

Queen Anne's Alcove

Physical Energy Statue

State Rooms

Queen VictoriaStatue

Sunken Garden

JennerStatue

LANCASTERGATE

MARLBOROUGHGATE

WESTBOURNEGATE

Queensway

THE LO

NG

WATER

Bayswater

Lancaster Gate

QUEEN'SGATE

PALACEGATE

ORME SQUAREGATE

BLACK LIONGATE

INVERNESS TERRACEGATE

PORCHESTER TERRACEGATE

THE ROUND POND

WES

T C

ARR

IAG

E D

RIVE

KENSINGTON GORE

THE FLOWER WALK

BAYSWATER ROAD

TH

E BR

OA

D W

ALK

HYDEPARK

KENSINGTONGARDENS

KensingtonPalace

King William III Statue

Kensington C

hurch Street

Studio Walk

High Street Kensington

Mount Walk

MOUNT GATE

STUDIO GATE

The Broad Walk

Albert Approach Road

Figure 2 Survey locations on Studio Walk

Studio Gate

Palace Entrance

Studio Walk (east)

TOILETS

TOILET FOR THE LESS ABLE

CHILDRENS TOILETS

PUBLIC TELEPHONE

REFRESHMENTS

CHILDRENS PLAYGROUND

PARK BOUNDARY

FOOTPATH

PUBLIC VEHICULAR ROADS BUILDINGS - RESTRICTED ACCESS

CAR PARKING

FLOWER BEDS

BUILDINGS - PUBLIC ACCESS

RESTRICTED AREAS

PUBLIC AREAS

KEY

POLICE

SHARED CYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH

CHILDRENS PLAYGROUND

FOOTPATH

PARK VEHICULAR ROADS

RESTRICTEDPARK VEHICULAR ROADS

KEY

POLICE HORSE PATH

DIANA MEMORIAL WALK

SWIMMING AREAJUNE - SEPTEMBER ONLY

The Barclays Cycle Hire schemeThe Barclays Cycle Hire scheme (BCHS) has been introduced in 2010 by Transport for London. Cycle hire bikes can be found in station areas within and immediately surrounding Kensington Gardens and are shown with a blue dot on the map in ”Figure 1 Study area and context” on page 6.

713 December 2010

The Broad Walk Shared Use Trial MonitoringExecutive Summary

Studio Walk shared use trialStudio Walk is a popular route in Kensington Gardens, attracting a signifi cant number of tourists. It is situated at the western end of the park connecting Mount Walk and Kensington Palace Avenue and provides an alternative east-west route to Bayswater Road. It is also one of few paths running from the west of the park to the key Broad Walk north-south route. The location of Studio Walk within the wider cycle network can be seen in Figure 3 alongside.

Atkins undertook a capacity assessment of Studio Walk in December 20081, which examined the potential consequences of opening this route for shared use. The implementation of a shared use trial and monitoring surveys were recommended.

Following the recent success of the shared use on The Broad Walk, Regent’s Park, The Royal Parks (TRP) have launched a trial of a shared use scheme on Studio Walk, Kensington Gardens. This will run from 2 August 2010 to 31 January 2012. Funded by The Royal Parks in partnership with Transport for London through the Cycling on Greenways scheme, the trial is aimed to encourage people to enjoy cycling in green spaces and to test the suitability of Studio Walk as a permanent cycling route.

The trial will be monitored for 18 months. The fi rst round of monitoring was undertaken during the school term in September 2010, the results of which are presented in this report. Park users were consulted throughout the process.

Critical success factors for the trial include a customer research survey, a shared use study, and a confl ict study, which were benchmarked against comparable studies.

1 “Kensington Gardens Studio Walk, Shared Use Level of Service Technical Note for The Royal Parks”, Atkins, 2008.

Figure 3 The location of Studio Walk in the wider cycle network

BOND STREET

LANCASTER GATE

MARBLE ARCH

NOTTING HILL GATE

OX

QUEENSWAY

HIGH STREET KENSINGTON

BAYSWATER

PADDINGTON

GRE

HYDE PARK CORNER

KNIGHTSBRIDGE

VICTORUnderground

Signed for cyclists

Recommended by cyclists

Through parks for walking and cycling

Adjacent to busy roads.May be shared with pedestrians

Pedestrians only

Popular Cycling Routes

Kensington Gardens

The London Cycle Network (LCN)

Studio Walk

The Broad Walk

Kensington Palace Avenue

Mount Walk

Bayswater Road

8


Monitoring objectivesThe Royal Parks Agency has commissioned Atkins to monitor Studio Walk to assess its performance as a permanent cycle route.

To ensure that the scheme is supported by all users, Atkins has undertaken an objective evidence-based research into the level of use and behaviour of users following the same methodology used in the monitoring of The Regent’s Park. This includes surveys to fully understand and investigate attitudes, behaviour, interactions and comfort of users at the outset of the scheme and throughout the trial period.

As it is the fi rst stage of the monitoring process, the aim has been to present an objective and evidence-based picture of user behaviour on Studio Walk. All surveys have made use of agreed best-practice guidelines and techniques, including guidance from Transport for London (TfL)1, the Department for Transport2 3 and ongoing research conducted by Atkins for TfL’s Cycling Walking Accessibility Greenways programme.

Surveys were undertaken to capture user activity and behavioural trends during peak periods of the week. These surveys were also used to benchmark user views and evaluate them against critical success factors in order to support the decision making process on the future of Studio Walk.

Questionnaire surveys were undertaken on 10th September 2010 and video surveys on 9th and 15th September 2010. As the same locations were used for both the questionnaire and video surveys, it was important that these were undertaken on different days to ensure that the staff undertaking the questionnaires did not interfere with the survey footage, and to ensure that representative information was collected.

1 Transport for London, London Cycling Design Standards. 20052 Department for Transport, Cycling in Pedestrian Areas. 20053 Department for Transport, Cycle Infrastructure Design. 2008

Critical success factors

The Royal Parks defi ned the following fi ve critical success factors4 benchmarked on previous research, which have been monitored during the trial period, and evaluated in “Evaluating Critical Success Factors” on page 12:

Criterion 1: No fewer than 95% of users surveyed during perception studies must rate the overall quality of the park ‘good’ or ‘excellent’.

Criterion 2: The level of comfort for pedestrians along Studio Walk must not fall below A or B during peak user activity (measured using Platoon Level of Service, a robust methodology developed from standard pedestrian Level of Service assessments5 6).

Criterion 3: Based on video surveys along Studio Walk more than 96% of cycle journeys must not involve neither minor confl ict nor major confl ict.

Criterion 4: 75% of pedestrians surveyed during perception studies should be satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with cycling on Studio Walk. The data collected will be further analysed with information on vulnerable users (classifi ed and registered disabled, elderly and people with children under fi ve years of age.) If there is a high proportion of this group who are uncomfortable this will be further assessed. Dog walkers will also be considered.

Criterion 5: 94% of cyclists surveyed during perception studies should be satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with cycling on Studio Walk.

As in previous monitoring studied conducted by Atkins for The Royal Parks, to assess criteria 4 and 5, surveys used the following fi ve categories: very uncomfortable, uncomfortable, satisfi ed, comfortable, very comfortable.

4 The Royal Parks, The Regent’s Park Broad Walk Shared-Use Cycle Project Summer Trial Report and Extended Trial Criteria. August 20085 Fruin, John J. Pedestrian Planning and Design. New York: Metropolitan Association of Urban Designers and Environmental Planners Inc. 19716 Pushkarev, Boris, and Jeffrey M. Zupan. Urban Space for Pedestrians: a Report of the Regional Plan Association. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass. 1975

Figure 4 Studio Walk as seen from The Broad Walk

Figure 5 Shared use on The Broad Walk, Kensington Gardens

Figure 6 Studio Gate entrance to Kensington Gardens

913 December 2010


How Studio Walk is usedThis section provides a summary of the use of Studio Walk for both cyclists and those on foot observed during the fi rst monitoring surveys. This assessment informs the critical success factors presented in “Evaluating Critical Success Factors” on page 12.

Activity levelsOur assessment of activity, behaviour and the effect on how people use the route is based on the morning and afternoon peak periods of weekday activity. On the day of the video survey (15th September 2010) the weather was cloudy with light drizzle towards the end of the day.

The results show Studio Walk is a space predominantly used by pedestrians, as shown in the tables in Figure 7. The peak hours for pedestrians and cyclists differ: the pedestrian peaks are 09:00-10:00 and 16:00-17:00, while cycle peaks are 08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00 (Figure 11). The pedestrian peaks are most likely due to tourists visiting Kensington Palace and schools’ fi nishing times. However those periods have the lowest cycling activity, with the cyclist peak profi le presenting a typical commuter pattern. Therefore a decision was made to consider the cyclist AM and PM peak hours, to capture the highest interaction between cyclists and pedestrians on Studio Walk.

The activity at Studio Gate is lower than that on Studio Walk (east). This is likely to be because of the three side paths that intersect Studio Walk leading to High Street Kensington, as well as the presence of tourists visiting Kensington Palace.

1% 1%13%

1% 1%

7%

13%1% 1%

14%

7%

13%1% 1%

64%

14%

7%

13%1% 1%

64%

14%

7%

13%1% 1%

64%

14%

7%

13%1% 1%

Adult PedestrianAdult Pedestrian

Child Pedestrian

Jogger

Adult Cyclist

Child Cyclist

Adult Pedestrian

Child Pedestrian

Jogger

Adult Cyclist

Child Cyclist

Adult Cyclist Walking with bike

Adult Cyclist Hire

Child Cyclist Hire

Adult Pedestrian

Child Pedestrian

Jogger

Adult Cyclist

Child Cyclist


Adult Cyclist Hire

Child Cyclist Hire

Rollerblader/ Skater

Mobility Impaired

Adult Pedestrian

Child Pedestrian

Jogger

Adult Cyclist

Child Cyclist


Adult Cyclist Hire

Child Cyclist Hire


Mobility Impaired

Adult Pedestrian

Child Pedestrian

Jogger

Adult Cyclist

Child Cyclist


Adult Cyclist Hire

Child Cyclist Hire


Mobility Impaired

8%

44%

14%

8%

44%

8%

5%

14%

8%

44%

21%

8%

5%

14%

8%

44%

21%

8%

5%

14%

8%

44%

21%

8%

5%

14%

8% No of Individuals

f f 3

No of Individuals

No of groups of 3

No of groups >4

No of Individuals

No of groups of 3

No of groups >4

No of Individuals

No of groups of 3

No of groups >4

No of Individuals

No of groups of 3

No of groups >4

No of groups of 2

f f

No of groups of 2

No of groups of 4

No of groups >10

No of groups of 2

No of groups of 4

No of groups >10

No of groups of 2

No of groups of 4

No of groups >10

No of groups of 2

No of groups of 4

No of groups >10

On average, there are nearly fi ve times more pedestrians than cyclists on a weekday (Figure 8). Around 20% of cyclists use the BCHS bikes along Studio Walk. This is likely to be infl uenced by the proximity to cycle hire docking stations at both ends of The Broad Walk (by Black Lion Gate and Palace Gate) and on Kensington Church Street (Figure 1 on page 6).

Kensington Palace has a large infl uence on pedestrian activity with large groups using Studio Walk observed to visit the Palace (14% with more than four people and 8% more than ten people).

These may affect the cycling activity on Studio Walk (see “Concerns about tourist groups along Studio Walk” on page 14), especially at weekends. It is recommended that this time is looked at in more detail.

In addition, the opening of the BCHS for tourists - with no need to pre-register for the scheme - may increase the number of hired cycles in future. This issue should be taken into account in future monitoring stages.

More information on our observation studies, including survey time periods, can be found in Appendix A “Observation studies” on page 18.

Survey Location: Studio Walk (east)

People per hour

Survey Date

Mode Weekday

AM Peak Hour *

PM Peak Hour **

Sept 2010

Pedestrians 484 618

Cyclists (owned) 136 86

Cyclists (hired) 30 28

* weekday AM Peak hour is 09:00-10:00 for pedestrians and 08:00-09:00 for cyclists.** weekday PM Peak hour is 16:00-17:00 for pedestrians and 17:00-18:00 for cyclists.

200

300

400

500PH

orAverage

CPH

0

100

200

300

400

500Average

PPHor

Average

CPH

Pedestrians

Cyclists437

95

255

79

400

600

800

PPH

0

200

400

600

800

07:00 08:00 09:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

PPH

400

600

800

CPH

0

200

400

600

800

07:00 08:00 09:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

CPH

Westbound Eastbound

pedestrians

cyclists

Survey Location: Studio Gate

People per hour

Survey Date

Mode Weekday

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

Sept 2010

Pedestrians 340 278

Cyclists (owned) 108 68

Cyclists (hired) 30 30

Studio Walk (east) Studio Gate

Figure 7 Summary of activity at peak hours on the weekday

Figure 8 Average activity at peak periods on the weekday

AM PM

Peak hour

Figure 9 Summary of demographic information during PM peak hour (1700- 1800)

Figure 10 Group sizes during PM peak hour (1700-1800)

Figure 11 Flow time profi le on Studio Walk (east)

10


Pedestrians

Cyclists

76% (2622)

92% (570)

24% (845)

8% (48)

25% (90)

50% (4)

54% (196)

25% (2)

21% (76)

25% (2)

62% (1072)

97.5% (456)

25% (426)

2% (10)

13% (230)

0.5% (2)

Users behaviour

The majority of people who use Studio Walk tend to walk the whole length of the route (Figure 12). Side paths are also well used, especially the diagonal path connecting The Broad Walk with King’s Arms Gate (south-western boundary of the Park).

The space opposite the entrance to Kensington Palace is heavily used by tourists.

Cycling is not allowed on the side paths but some activity is observed, especially on the diagonal path by Studio Walk (east), as shown in Figure 13. 48 cyclists were recorded using this path during the survey period.

Figure 12 Cyclist entering the non-cycling path from Studio Walk

Studio Gate

At the western end of Studio Walk, Studio Gate, there is a “cyclists dismount” sign. From the observation of footage, cyclists do generally slow down before reaching the gate because of the guardrail at Studio Gate, mounted outside the boundary of the Park. However, very few cyclists actually dismount their bikes (6%).

Figure 13 Direction split of pedestrians at the junctions along Studio Walk

Figure 14 Direction split of cyclists at the junctions along Studio Walk

Figure 15 Cyclist and pedestrians sharing Studio Walk by Studio Gate - from video footage

Figure 16 Cyclist dismounting at Studio Gate

1113 December 2010


Questionnaire responses

Survey Date Weekday

Stage 1 Sept 2010 207

Questionnaire surveysPedestrians and cyclists were asked to complete questionnaires on site by trained staff along Studio Walk. The questionnaire surveys were undertaken on a different day to video surveys, 10th September, to ensure that the staff did not infl uence observed behaviour. The weather on the survey day was cloudy but mild. An example of the questionnaire used - as well as details of the surveys - can be found in Appendix A “Observation studies” on page 18.

We provided people the opportunity to either fi ll out the questionnaire on site, take it home and post it back free of charge, or to fi ll it out on-line. We found that the great majority preferred answering on site (144 of 207), with only 59 postal and 4 on-line responses.

Currently two thirds of respondents were aware of the shared use trial scheme.

36%

Yes

No

64%

36%

Yes

No

31%

Yes

No

69%

31%

Yes

No

pedestrians

cyclists

Cyclist speed

A key indicator of cycling behaviour is speed, which can vary with several factors including the physical characteristics and design of a route, its strategic importance on a transport network, and user activity. The combination and relevance of these factors (and others) is site specifi c, and vary according to location.

The speed of a representative sample of cyclists was measured during both the AM and PM peaks during a weekday. Average cycling speeds are similar in morning and late afternoon peak hours (11.3 mph and 10.7 mph respectively, Figure 17) and are in line with those recorded in other London parks. This is despite the incline at the east end of Studio Walk.

10.7

Weekday PM

10.5

10.7

Weekday PM

10.5

11.3

10.7

Weekday PM

11.8

10.5

11.3

10.7

Weekday AM

Weekday PM

11.8

10.5

11.3

10.7

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00

Weekday AM

Weekday PM

11.8

10.5

11.3

10.7

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00

Weekday AM

Weekday PM

mph

Mean SpeedMean Speed

Median Speed

Figure 17 Cycling speed on Studio Walk east (08:00-09:00; 17:00-18:00)

Figure 18 Pedestrians sharing Studio Walk with a cyclist

Figure 19 Aware of Shared Use trial by pedestrians

Figure 20 Aware of Shared Use trial by cyclists

12


Main fi ndings:

Taking into account the effect of cyclists, the Platoon Level of Service for pedestrians along the majority of Studio Walk is calculated as A and B. This accounts for the presence of obstructions such as street furniture (e.g. benches and high fence) on the path.

Studio Walk is a straight shared use path with a relatively steep downhill gradient at the eastern end, between 6% and 10% at its steepest point. However this is only for a distance of approximately 20m, and the western part of the path is fl at. The tarmac is currently in good conditions and the path shows good sight lines. The street furniture is consistently located on the southern side of the path, with a high fence along the northern side.

This Level of Service assessment suggests that there is suffi cient space along this route at weekday peak times to accommodate a shared use facility with the current level of user activity. However, this route is likely to have much higher pedestrian activity at weekends. Therefore it is recommended to conduct this assessment for weekends to ensure that there is suffi cient capacity at peak times.

• Studio Walk (east) is calculated as A, with all pedestrians or one cyclist taken into account, and at B, with two cyclists taken into account.

• Studio Gate is calculated as A, with all pedestrians or one cyclist taken into account, and at B, with two cyclists taken into account.

Figure 21 Perception of the park

Criterion 2: Pass

The level of comfort for pedestrians along Studio Walk must not fall below A or B (measured using the Platoon Level of Service methodology).

This criterion is equivalent to that used in the monitoring of The Broad Walk Shared Use Trial Scheme, The Regent’s Park, described as:

“The level of service for The Broad Walk must be B or above for peak pedestrian/cycle fl ows based on video footage and the physical attributes of the route.” This is benchmarked against the Kensington Gardens Shared Use Study carried out by Atkins in 2008. Levels are from A (open movement) to F (jammed). The Level of Service on the Broad Walk without cycling is Level of Service B.2

The design of a path can be important to encourage, or hinder, responsible use by all users. In particular, the width of a path and its capacity can be a key driver for successfully sharing space. When assessing the capacity of a path and its design it is important to take into account the level of pedestrian and cycling activity, and how activity on the path varies with time. This supports an understanding of how a path functions during commuting periods or during busy weekend afternoons, when capacity issues can be signifi cantly different.

Using research conducted by Atkins for Transport for London on shared use cycle routes, the Level of Service has been calculated for pedestrians during Studio Walk shared use trial. Level of Service is a standard measurement of pedestrian capacity and level of comfort. In this context, the methodology assesses the peak volume of pedestrian fl ow activity and the amount of available, usable space for pedestrians.

2 The Royal Parks, The Regent’s Park Broad Walk Shared-Use Cycle Project Summer Trial Report and Extended Trial Criteria. August 2008

Criterion 1: Pass

No fewer than 95% of users surveyed during perception studies must rate the overall quality of the park ‘good’ or ‘excellent’.

“Based on customer research surveys, anything more than a 2% drop in respondents fi nding the ‘quality of their visit excellent or good’ with ‘cycling in the park’ as a stated reason fails this criterion.” This is benchmarked against customer research studies carried out in The Regent’s Park by Synovate in 2005 & 2006 in which 97% of respondents found the ‘quality of their visit excellent or good.1

Main fi ndings:

Users’ opinions of the park are very high, with 99% of weekday users rating the overall quality of the park as good or excellent (Figure 21).


36%

0%

0%0%

1%

Excellent Good

Satisfactory Poor

63%

36%

0%

0%0%

1%

Excellent Good

Satisfactory Poor

Very Poor No Opinion

(126)

(72)

(2)

Minimum Path Width RequirementShared-Use

path

ed

ge

cycl

ist

edge

zon

e0.

5m p

er e

dge

(0m

bes

ide

gras

s)

pede

stria

n ed

ge z

one

0.2`

m p

er e

dge

(0m

bes

ide

gras

s)

path

ed

ge

pede

stria

n / c

yclis

t pa

ssin

g zo

ne0.

5m p

er e

dge

4.5mMinimum distance (excluding edge zones)

0.3mMinimum distance

between group

0.6m0.6m


pass

ing

dist

ance

1m 1m

Figure 22 Desirable minimum path width recommended for unsegregated shared use (active/high activity)

Evaluating Critical Success Factors

1313 December 2010


Criterion 3: Pass

Based on video surveys along Studio Walk more than 95% of cycle journeys must involve neither minor confl ict nor major confl ict.

“Based on at least six days of video footage, more than 95% of cycle journeys will involve neither minor confl ict nor major confl ict.“ This is benchmarked from research on Palace Walk in Kensington Gardens – from a Friday and a Saturday there were 3,518 cycle journeys: 137 involved minor or major confl ict – 3 were major confl ict situations. Minor Confl ict is defi ned as ‘cyclist or pedestrian has to brake or change direction but the movement is calm and controlled within a 2m distance of each other’. Major confl ict is defi ned as ‘cyclist or pedestrian has to take emergency action, within 1m of each other, in what is considered to be a near miss’.1

Assessing the number of confl icts between pedestrians and cyclists is key to evaluating the success of the shared use scheme. Typical user behaviour along cycling and walking routes can vary depending on factors including, but not limited to, current activity levels, the type of user, proportions of each user group and the design of the space (its proposed use and how it is used in practice).

The level of potential confl ict is sometimes perceived to increase on unsegregated shared use routes, particularly as there is no designated exclusive space for either pedestrians or cyclists. However, unsegregated space can increase the awareness of pedestrian priority amongst all users, and support considerate cycling by the majority of cyclists.


Main fi ndings:

To understand the behaviours along Studio Walk, three locations were assessed (Figure 23 below):

• On Studio Walk (east) - out of a total of 272 cycle journeys, only one minor confl ict was highlighted.

• Palace entrance, Studio Walk - two minor confl icts were highlighted, out of approximately 250 cycle journeys.

286 Euston RoadLondon NW1 3AT

Introduction Unexpected Action Response

Studio Walk (east) Wednesday 17:22:17Minor conflict

A group of 3 pedestrian stopped at the entry to Studio Walk and a cyclist is heading East towards The Broad Walk.

Pedestrians do not see the cyclist, whilst another pedestrian stops.

Cyclist swerves. EastboundHigh (zig-zagging)

No Normal <1

Indicative Passing Distance (metres)

Indicative Speed of Cyclist

Child Cyclist?Cyclist Direction

of TravelCyclist

Tortousity

Description

TimeDayLocationInteraction

Grade



Palace entrance Wednesday 08:12:10Minor conflict

A cyclist and a pedestrian in front heading eastwards on Studio Walk. Two joggers approaching from the east. A lorry parked outside the Palace entrance.

Cyclisted slowed down and wiggle between pedestrian and joggers.

Pedestrian stopped as did not noticed the cyclist closely behind to go pass.

EastboundLow (mostly

straight)Yes Slow <1


A group of people walking spreadout on Studio Wak heading east. A cyclist with trailer approaching them from the east.

A group of three pedestrians unaware of the cyclist and walked in front of the cyclist and stopped.

Cyclist slowed down, stopped and wiggle through between them. Child pedestrian was forced to walk back to allow enough space for cyclist to pass through

WestboundHigh (zig-zagging)

No Normal <1


Grade




of TravelCyclist

Tortousity

Description

cyclist to pass through.



Studio Gate Wednesday 08:35:49Minor conflict

Cyclist exiting Studio Walk and a jogger entering.

Cyclist did not slow down or get off the bike.

Both cyclist and jogger stopped at entry gate to give way to jogger.

WestboundVery Low (straight)

No Normal/Fast <1


Both pedestrian and cyclist entering Studio Walk

Pedestrian changed walking direction to southwards and cyclist continue towards the east.

Pedestrian stopped to let cyclist continue.

EastboundVery Low (straight)

No Slow 1-2


Child cyclist exiting Studio Walk and an adult cyclist entering.

Child cyclist saw adult cyclist at the entry gate

Child cyclist stopped at guardrail and swerved to let adult cyclist walked in on foot.


Yes Normal <1

Studio Gate Wednesday 08:49:40Minor

A pedestrian with a dog stopped at the western end of Studio Walk Two cyclists entering as normal and Pedestrian stopped to let cyclists

EastboundVery Low

No Slow 1-2


Grade




of TravelCyclist

Tortousity

Description

Studio Gate Wednesday 08:49:40conflict and two cyclists entering Studio

Walk.swerved between the pedestrian. pass before release his dog.

Eastbound(straight)

No Slow 1-2


Cyclist with trailer exiting Studio Walk and a pedestrian approaching Studio Walk

Pedestrian sees cyclist exiting without dismounting the bike

Pedestrian stopped outside the guardrail to give way for cyclist to exit


No Slow >2

Figure 23 Summary of interactions in three key locations

Studio Walk (east)

Palace Entrance

Studio Gate

Figure 24 An example of “minor confl ict”

1

2

3

4

Cyclist exiting

Cyclist does not dismount

Joggers enter the park

Cyclist and jogger pass each other at <1m

• Studio Gate, Studio Walk - out of a total of 230 cycle journeys, fi ve minor confl icts were highlighted, 2%.

An example of “minor confl ict” is illustrated in Figure 24.

14


Figure 25 “Minor confl ict” between a cyclist and a large group of pedestrians on the eastern end of Studio Walk

1

3

2

4

Concerns about tourist groups along Studio Walk

It is noted that large groups of pedestrians use Studio Walk to reach the entrance to Kensington Palace and/or to take photographs. They can represent an obstruction to cyclists as well as other pedestrians.

An example of interaction of cyclists with a big group of pedestrians is shown in Figure 25. A cyclist is going east towards The Broad Walk on Studio Walk, keeping left to avoid a large group of people walking in the same direction (1). The group don’t see the cyclist coming and stop (2), forcing the cyclist to swerve around them (3) to then continue his journey on Mount Walk (4).

This type of interaction with large pedestrian groups was not seen in previous monitoring studies conducted by Atkins in other Royal Parks. Though not affecting the overall rating of the park for Criterion 3, it is important that this is reviewed to ensure any risks are managed.

It should be noted that the number of large groups on Studio Walk is likely to be higher on weekends. Further investigation is recommended to understand if this results in any problem during the weekends.

Cyclist swerves

1513 December 2010


25%

15%

13%

7%2%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

V f t bl

25%

38%

15%

13%

7%2%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable

No experience/opinion

17%

17%33%

5%6%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable

17%

17%

22%

33%

5%6%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable


813

16

16

18

71

27

4

7

5

5

7

30

2 3

48

19

1 1 21

3 5 10

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

813

16

16

18

71

0

7 11

27

128

68

0

4

7

5

5

7

30

0

2 3

48

19

0

1 1 21

3 5 10

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Under 16 17-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 Over 55 Total

Dog walkers make up 12% of respondents on a weekday. Of all dog walkers surveyed during the week, only 56% were either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with the shared use trial (Figure 29).

People with young children make up another 12% of respondents. Of all people with young children, only 63% were either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with the shared use trial, (Figure 30).

No respondents considered themselves to have disabilities.

Criterion 4: Pass

75% of pedestrians surveyed during perception studies should be either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with cycling on Studio Walk.

“This is benchmarked against surveys in Kensington Gardens in which 74% of pedestrians thought the cycle routes worked OK, Well, or Very Well. The data collected will be further analysed with information on vulnerable users (classifi ed and registered disabled, elderly and people with children under 5 years of age). If there is a higher proportion of this group who are ‘uncomfortable’ with the scheme this will be a critical failure. Dog walkers will also be considered in a separate category. Further analysis will be carried out and considered if the percentage falls between 95% and 75% (one in twenty to one in four ‘uncomfortable’ with the trial).” 1

Main fi ndings:

In total, 84% of all surveyed pedestrians who expressed an opinion are either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with the shared use trial (Figure 26).

Of all respondents, perceived comfort tends to decrease with age, as shown in Figure 27. With about a third of respondents over the age of 55 not comfortable or very uncomfortable with the shared use trial.

Pedestrians have high opinions of the shared use status of Studio Walk, with 78% of pedestrians either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with the scheme (Figure 28).


5%

42%21%

16%Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable

5%

42%

16%

21%

16%Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable


34%

15%

10%

5% 1%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

V f t bl

34%

35%

15%

10%

5% 1%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable


Figure 26 Overall comfort with the scheme

Figure 27 Comfort of all weekday users by age

Figure 28 Pedestrians’ comfort with the scheme

Figure 29 Dog walkers’ comfort with the scheme

Figure 30 People with young children’s comfort with the scheme

Comments:

• “Good, not fun going down the High Street, the park is much safer”

• “I observe that cyclists seem to reduce their speed on shared use”

• “As long as cyclists don’t speed, no problem”

• “Pedestrians should get precedence and cyclists be reminded of this by means of a notice”

• “I’d prefer the words ‘shared use cycles and pedestrians’ title instead of the symbol”

• “Cyclists, dogs, people and children do not mix well”

16


Criterion 5: Pass

94% of cyclists surveyed during perception studies should be either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with cycling on Studio Walk.

“This is benchmarked against surveys in Kensington Gardens in which 94% of cyclists thought the cycle routes worked OK, Well, or Very Well).”1

Main fi ndings:

All 55 cyclist respondents are either satisfi ed, comfortable or very comfortable with the shared use trial.

Some people suggested a segregated path should be in place, although research suggest this would increase cycling speeds and potential confl ict with pedestrians. Others do not understand the shared use signage on the ground.


27%

15%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

V f t bl58%27%

15%

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Satisfactory

Not comfortable

Very uncomfortable


Figure 31 Cyclists’ comfort with the scheme

Comments:

• “Very positive. Cycle routes through Kensington Gardens provide a safe, enjoyable and sustainable means of commuting into central London, and should be strongly supported”

• “It works well with Studio Walk now open for cycling”

• “Opening this has shortened my journey and I can say have had no problem with pedestrians”

• “Very well, I use it as my commute”

• “Important that cyclists are respectful. Hope cycling access remains in place”

• “The shared paths should be marked, with one for bikes and others for pedestrians, like Rotten Row”

• “A dedicated cycle lane would be better”

Figure 32 Shared use signage used on Studio Walk

Figure 33 Pedestrians and cyclists sharing Studio Walk

1713 December 2010


• Average cycling speeds are about 11 mph

• Some cycling observed on this path

• Level of comfort for pedestrians is A or B

• Level of comfort for pedestrians is A or B

• Some cyclists were seen using the side paths off Studio Walk, and 94% did not observe the “cyclists dismount” instruction at Studio Gate

• The presence of large groups of tourists represent a potential confl ict with cyclist movement in the study area. Their number is likely to be higher on weekends, which were not surveyed for this study. This may require further investigation.

• Large groups of tourists to Kensington Palace can negatively affect cycling movement on Studio Walk, especially at weekends

Figure 34 Map of key fi ndings on cyclist and pedestrian movement on Studio Walk

Studio Walk (east)

entrance to Kensington Palace

Studio gate

side path

side path

side path

ConclusionsKensington Gardens is a very important resource for local residents and a key tourist attraction in London. Studio Walk Shared Use trial encourages cycling in the park and offers a more integrated east-west route to cyclists.

The fi rst monitoring stage shows that all the criteria set out for the trial are met. Despite the incline near the junction with the Broad Walk, the average cycling speeds on Studio Walk are in line with those recorded in other parks in London. Overall satisfaction levels of the trial were high, however it should be noted that some concerns were raised on shared use by people with dogs and people with young children. The key fi ndings of this research are shown in Figure 34 alongside.

As such, we would recommend that a review is undertaken at the weekend to re-inforce the weekday assessments and to ensure the high levels of satisfaction and low levels of confl ict remain during the peak leisure fl ows.

1810 December 2010

a Observation studies

19


IntroductionThis section provides details of our observation studies.

Our assessment of activity, behaviour and the effect on how people use the shared route on Studio Walk is based on video footage.

Statistics on users’ perception are based on questionnaire surveys, which were conducted on site on 10th September 2010.

The three locations considered in this study are shown in Figure 35 below.

Figure 35 Survey locations on Studio Walk

Studio Gate

Palace Entrance

Studio Walk (east)

Flow survey

Methodology

The method used for this study is known as the ‘stationary gate method’ whereby all pedestrians and cyclists who cross an imaginary line are counted during fi xed periods. Directionality is recorded as appropriate.

At each stage, using video footage recorded on a weekday (see table alongside) we undertook a count of all the footage at two key locations (Studio Walk East and Studio Gate), split into 15 minute time intervals. From this survey we obtained a time profi le for the day and defi ned the peak hour of activity (based on the highest cyclist activity).

Subsequently, a continuous count of pedestrians and cyclists was undertaken at all locations for the peak hour of activity. This was also used to collect demographic data of the park’s users.

Wherever possible, cyclists using a hired bicycle were counted separately from cyclists using their own bike. Due to the quality of video footage, the difference between the two types can be unclear at times. As a result, the number of cycle hire cyclists could be underestimated.

Video footage

All survey locations - except Studio Walk (east) between 07:00 and 08:30

Stage 1

Date: 15th September 2010

Day: Wednesday

Times: 07:00-10:00 and 16:00-19:00

Total gates: 3 sample locations

Frequency: Every half an hour

Duration: 15 minute intervals

Total duration: 495 minutes sampled

Weather: Mostly cloudy, drizzly at times

Method: Video footage

Studio walk (east) between 07:00 and 08:30

Stage 1

Date: 9th September 2010

Day: Thursday

Times: 07:00 - 08:30

Total gates: 1 sample location

Frequency: Every half an hour

Duration: 15 minutes

Total duration: 45 minutes sampled

Weather: Cloudy

Method: Video footage

Figure 36 Video footage dates and time periods

Due to a technical fault, the assessment of Studio Walk (east) location between 7:00 and 8:30 is based on footage fi lmed on 9th September 2010. The assessments of all other time periods and locations are based on footage fi lmed on 15th September 2010 (Figure 36).

Data was collected on the following periods:

• weekday morning peak (07:00-10:00)

• weekday afternoon peak (16:00-19:00)

2010 December 2010

The Broad Walk Shared Use Trial MonitoringObservation studies

Questionnaire Surveys

Methodology

Pedestrians and cyclists were asked to complete questionnaires on site by trained staff along Studio Walk.

In addition, we provided the opportunity for members of the public to take a questionnaire home and post it back free of charge, or fi ll out the questionnaire online, if they did not have the time to complete it on-site. Figure 38 to Figure 40 show the questionnaire that was used.

Intelligent Space Atkins

Euston Tower 286 Euston Road

London NW1 3AT

[email protected]

www.atkinsglobal.com www.intelligentspace.com

Intelligent Space is a WS Atkins plc company Registered Office: Woodcote Grove Ashley Road Epsom Surrey KT18 5BW England Registered in England Company Number: 5609795

10/09/2010

Studio Walk, Kensington Gardens

Thank you very much for taking this questionnaire. It should take no longer than five minutes to

complete. This survey is being carried out by Atkins Intelligent Space on behalf of the Royal Parks.

A shared use cycle and pedestrian trial is running from 2 August 2010 to 31 January 2012 on Studio

Walk, Kensington Gardens. As part of the trial, Atkins Intelligent Space is investigating the attitudes and

opinions of different users of Kensington Gardens towards the scheme.

We would be grateful if you could fill out the attached questionnaire regarding your visit to the park.

Please return the questionnaire to Atkins Intelligent Space within two weeks using the postage-paid

addressed envelope provided.

The cycle trial aims to encourage people to enjoy cycling in green spaces and test the suitability of Studio

Walk as a permanent cycling route. The trial will be monitored for 18 months. Park users will be

consulted throughout the process.

If you have any specific queries about this questionnaire, or would prefer a copy in large print, please

contact our team on 0207 121 2558 or email us at [email protected]. If you have any

general queries about this survey, please contact The Royal Parks at [email protected].

Alternatively, complete this questionnaire online at:

www.intelligentspace.com/kensingtongardens

Time ______________________ 16a Gender (tick) M X F XDate ______________________ 16b Age (tick) <16 X 17-25 X 26-35 X 36-45 X 46-55 X >55 XLocation (from map) _______ 16c Group size (tick) 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X > 4 XObserver ID _______________

ii User Type - Please circle or

1 What was your main means of transport to the Park today? X WalkX Cycle (please circle) Own or X Tube/Underground: please specify X Local BusX CarX CoachX Taxi/minicabX Train : please specifyX Other : please specify

2 How frequently do you come to this park? X 5 times a week or more X yearlyX 1 - 4 times a week X Less than once a yearX monthly X First visit

3 In which seasons do you visit/use the Park? X All year round X AutumnX Spring X WinterX Summer

4a How long did your journey to this park take today? X Less than 5 minutes X 20 - 30 minutesX 5 - 10 minutes X more than 30 minutesX 10- 15 minutes X don't know / can't rememberX 15 - 20 minutes

4b How far did you travel to reach the park today? X Less than 1 mile X 5 - 10 milesX 1 -2 miles X more than 10 milesX 2 - 5 miles X don't know / other

5 How long do you intend staying in the park on this visit? X 30 minutes or less X 3 - 4 hours

CyclistPedestrian

Cycle Hire

Intelligent Space Partnership is undertaking a short survey as part of a streetscape audit for Southwark Council. Would you be able to answer some short questions?

Atkins Intelligent Space is undertaking this questionnaire survey on behalf of The Royal Parks as part of an extensive survey of Park users. We would be very grateful if you would answer a few questions. It shouldn't take longer than a few minutes.

Kensington GardensQUESTIONNAIRE10/09/ 2010

g y y g pX 31 - 60 minutes X 4 - 5 hoursX 1 - 2 hours X More than 5 hoursX 2 - 3 hours X Don’t know

6 How would you rate the quality of the Park overall? X Excellent (Go to Q8) X Poor (Go to Q7)X Good (Go to Q8) X Very poor (Go to Q7)X Satisfactory (Go to Q7) X No opinion (Go to Q8)

7What has affected your enjoyment of the Park today? (ASK ONLY IF SATISFACTORY, POOR, or VERY POOR in Q6)____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

8Are you aware of the current Pilot Scheme whereby pedestrians and cyclists share the Studio Walk?

9a

9b Any additional comments?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

10 Overall how do you feel about cycling in Kensington Gardens?____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

11 Do you have any comments about cycling, walking or shared use on Studio Walk?____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

No

very comfortable; no

perception of conflict

1 2 3 5satisfactory;

conflicts mostly without incident

no opinion / no

experience

How do you feel about the current Pilot Scheme whereby pedestrians and cyclists share the Studio Walk? very

uncomfortable; perception that conflicts or near misses frequent

not comfortable; perception that conflicts/near misses quite

frequent

Yes

04comfortable; perception that conflict rare and mostly without

incident

Atkins Intelligent Space is undertaking this questionnaire survey on behalf of The Royal Parks as part of an extensive survey of Park users. We would be very grateful if you would answer a few questions. It shouldn't take longer than a few minutes.

Kensington GardensQUESTIONNAIRE10/09/ 2010

Figure 37 Undertaking an on-site questionnaire Figure 38 Example Questionnaire (postal), page 1 Figure 39 Example Questionnaire (postal), page 2

21


12 If cycling

a How often do you cycle on Studio Walk? Circle Daily ; More than once a week ; More than once a month ; More than once a year ; Less than once a year ; 1st time

b What is the purpose for cycling? X Leisure X commuting X Avoid busy roads X Other

cDo you ever cycle on other paths in Kensington Gardens where cyclists are not allowed?

13 If walking a dog

a Number of dogs

b How often do you walk your dog/s in Kensington Gardens? Daily ; More than once a week ; More than once a month ; More than once a year ; Less than once a year ; 1st time

14 If with young children

a Number of children

b How often do you bring your children to Kensington Gardens? Daily ; More than once a week ; More than once a month ; More than once a year ; Less than once a year ; 1st time

c Do you ever use a pushchair?

d Do your children bring bicycles/ scooters?

It would be helpful if you could provide the following information. You are under no obligation to give it.

15 Do you consider yourself to have a disability that affects X Visual or hearing impaired

your use of the parks and open spaces ? X Mobility impairedX Other - please specify

17 What is the first part of your postcode (e.g. W8) or country?

18 Do you belong to any organisation which has a particular interest in Kensington Gardens? If so, please give details____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Failed responsesPlease Tally

No

Yes No

Yes

Yes No

Figure 40 Example Questionnaire (postal), page 3

Speed survey

Methodology

Cycling speed surveys were undertaken at Studio Walk (east) during the morning and the afternoon peak hours. Cycling speed at this location was of concern due to the high level of pedestrian and cycling fl ows, as well as the presence of a level change which could increase the speed of cyclist going towards Studio Gate.

A sample of 40 cyclists were observed, 20 at AM peak and 20 at PM peak.

2210 December 2010


Interactions study

Introduction

Assessing the number of interactions and confl icts between pedestrians and cyclists is key to determining the success of the shared use trial on Studio Walk.

Typical user behaviour along cycling and walking routes can vary depending on factors such as:

• The type of user;

• The design of the space, its proposed use and how it is used in practice;

• The current activity levels and proportion of each user type;

• The individual circumstance.

Shared use routes raise the possibility of interactions between pedestrians and cyclists, particularly as there are no designated spaces for each user type to use.

Our approach

Following the same methodology as monitoring studies of The Regent’s Park, London, an analysis of interactions and confl icts between cyclists and pedestrians was undertaken using video footage at the three sections of Studio Walk, Kensington Gardens, shown in Figure 35 on page 19.

Surveys took place at peak hours (08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00 on a weekday (15th September 2010), with the exception of the Studio Gate location, where footage fi lmed on 9th September 2010 was considered between 08:00 and 08:30.

Types of interaction and confl ict

In addition to what is considered typical behaviour, there are four types of interactions and near-miss scenarios categorised as potential confl icts:

Minor confl ict

In response to unexpected action, a cyclist or pedestrian has to brake or change direction to avoid a collision, but movement is generally calm and controlled. Factors that affect a minor confl ict could include:

• At least one party may be unaware of the other’s intended route (poor visibility on approach, high speed or narrow passing distance).

• The rate of change in velocity needed to avoid collision is low, and/or movement is calm and controlled.

• The perceived consequence of neither party taking action could be a collision.

Major confl ict

In response to unexpected action, a cyclist or pedestrian has to take emergency action in what is considered to be a near miss.

Factors that affect a major confl ict could include:

• The rate of change in velocity needed to avoid collision is high and/or movement is uncontrolled.

• At least one party is unaware of the other’s intended route (poor visibility on approach, high speed and/ or narrow passing distance).

• The perceived consequence of neither party taking action could be a severe collision.

Collision

Actual physical contact, could be slight or severe.

• No collisions were observed or assessed along Studio Walk during our survey.

Further information

A full list of recorded confl icts can be found in the appendix, and are described around the criteria of:

• A description of events

• Time of day and date of the event

• Indicative passing distance

• Indicative speed

An example of confl ict recorded on Studio Walk is shown in Figure 41 on page 23. A summary of the interactions recorded is shown in Figure 42 on page 23.

23


Figure 41 Example of minor confl ict on Studio Walk

1

2

3

4

Cyclist by Studio Walk (east)

Pedestrians do not notice the cyclist

Cyclist swerves to avoid the pedestrians

Cyclist passes very close to one of the pedestrians



Studio Walk (east) Wednesday 17:22:17Minor conflict

A group of 3 pedestrian stopped at the entry to Studio Walk and a cyclist is heading East towards The Broad Walk.

Pedestrians do not see the cyclist, whilst another pedestrian stops.

Cyclist swerves. EastboundHigh (zig-zagging)

No Normal <1




of TravelCyclist

Tortousity

Description


Grade




A cyclist and a pedestrian in front heading eastwards on Studio Walk. Two joggers approaching from the east. A lorry parked outside the Palace entrance.

Cyclisted slowed down and wiggle between pedestrian and joggers.

Pedestrian stopped as did not noticed the cyclist closely behind to go pass.

EastboundLow (mostly

straight)Yes Slow <1


A group of people walking spreadout on Studio Wak heading east. A cyclist with trailer approaching them from the east.

A group of three pedestrians unaware of the cyclist and walked in front of the cyclist and stopped.

Cyclist slowed down, stopped and wiggle through between them. Child pedestrian was forced to walk back to allow enough space for cyclist to pass through

WestboundHigh (zig-zagging)

No Normal <1


Grade




of TravelCyclist

Tortousity

Description

cyclist to pass through.




Cyclist exiting Studio Walk and a jogger entering.

Cyclist did not slow down or get off the bike.

Both cyclist and jogger stopped at entry gate to give way to jogger.


No Normal/Fast <1


Both pedestrian and cyclist entering Studio Walk

Pedestrian changed walking direction to southwards and cyclist continue towards the east.

Pedestrian stopped to let cyclist continue.

EastboundVery Low (straight)

No Slow 1-2


Child cyclist exiting Studio Walk and an adult cyclist entering.

Child cyclist saw adult cyclist at the entry gate

Child cyclist stopped at guardrail and swerved to let adult cyclist walked in on foot.


Yes Normal <1

Studio Gate Wednesday 08:49:40Minor

A pedestrian with a dog stopped at the western end of Studio Walk Two cyclists entering as normal and Pedestrian stopped to let cyclists

EastboundVery Low

No Slow 1-2


Grade




of TravelCyclist

Tortousity

Description

Studio Gate Wednesday 08:49:40conflict and two cyclists entering Studio

Walk.swerved between the pedestrian. pass before release his dog.

Eastbound(straight)

No Slow 1-2


Cyclist with trailer exiting Studio Walk and a pedestrian approaching Studio Walk

Pedestrian sees cyclist exiting without dismounting the bike

Pedestrian stopped outside the guardrail to give way for cyclist to exit


No Slow >2

Figure 42 Summary of interactions in three key locations

Studio Walk (east)

Palace Entrance

Studio Gate

2410 December 2010


2510 December 2010

b Level of comfort assessment

26


A Open

B Impeded

C Constrained

D Congested

E Crowded

F Jammed

Platoon LOS Description

IntroductionThe design of a path can be important to encourage, or hinder, responsible use by all users. In particular, the width of a path and its capacity can be a key driver for successfully sharing space.

When assessing the capacity of a path and its design it is important to take into account the level of pedestrian and cyclist activity, and how activity on the path varies with time. This supports an understanding of how a path functions during commuting periods or during busy weekend afternoons, when capacity issues are signifi cant.

1m

Cyclist width(DfT 2008)

0.5medge bounding

0mbeside grass

Cyclist edge zones


Width required by two cyclists(DfT 2008)

pass

ing

dist

ance

1m 1m

0.6m

Person width(Fruin)


between couple

Width required by two pedestrians(Level of Service for London 2008)

0.6m0.6m

0.2medge bounding

0mbeside grass

Pedestrian edge zones

Our approachUsing research conducted by Atkins for Transport for London on shared use cycle routes, we have assessed the Level of Service for pedestrians during Studio Walk Shared Use trial.

Level of Service is a standard measurement of pedestrian capacity and level of comfort. In this context, the methodology assesses the peak volume of pedestrian fl ow activity and the amount of available, usable space for users.

Platoon Level of Service

Level of Service is measured on a sliding scale to benchmark the level of comfort of routes from A, with plenty of available space to walk or cycle freely, through F, where the crowd and space available minimises the freedom of movement. This is shown in Figure 43.

The Platoon Level of Service standard takes into account grouping of pedestrians, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, which tends to reduce the level of comfort for each user. The Platoon Level of Service is therefore appropriate for open space and park environments such as Studio Walk where people often walk together.

Space requirements

Although the capacity of a shared use or segregated path is dependent on the level of pedestrian and cyclist activity, there are desirable minimum widths which accommodate a rudimentary level of use.

User widths

Guidance on minimum and recommended widths for shared and segregated cycling routes in open spaces is inconsistent. Atkins is preparing a guidance document for TfL on cycling walking and accessibility on London’s greenways, which in part aims to assess current guidelines and clarify the amount of space cyclists and pedestrians typically use. Figure 44 shows the space requirements for cyclists and pedestrians, as determined by ongoing evaluation of current guidelines and fi ndings.

Cyclist widths are taken from DfT1 and pedestrian widths are taken from guidance prepared by Atkins Intelligent Space for TfL’s Level of Service for London project.

The width of a pavement available for users tends to be less than the actual width of the path. This is often due to a combination of two reasons:

• Obstructions such as street furniture (e.g. bins, benches and signs) will reduce the amount of width available for users

• Users tend to leave space between themselves and the path edge, which can be adjacent to a wall, fence or other obstruction.

These edge zones for cyclists and pedestrians shown in Figure 44 have been taken into account in our analysis.

1 Cycle Infrastructure Design, Local Transport Note 2/08, October 2008, DfT

Figure 43 Platoon Level of Service descriptions Figure 44 Pedestrian and cyclist space requirements

2710 December 2010

The Broad Walk Shared Use Trial MonitoringLevel of comfort assessment

Minimum path width

Based on user widths, the recommended minimum width of an unsegregated shared use route is a provided in Figure 45, which is based on low pedestrian and cyclist activity. The minimum path width of 3.0m allows for one cyclist and two pedestrians to pass side-by-side. Figure 46 provides a desirable minimum path width for an unsegregated route with active / high pedestrian and cyclist activity. The minimum path width of 4.5m allows for two cyclists and two pedestrians to pass side-by-side.

Minimum Path Width RequirementUnsegregated Shared-Use

path

edge

cycl

ist

edge

zon

e0.

5m p

er e

dge

(0m

bes

ide

gras

s)

pede

stria

n ed

ge z

one

0.2`

m p

er e

dge

(0m

bes

ide

gras

s)

path

edge

1m

pede

stria

n / c

yclis

t pa

ssin

g zo

ne0.

5m p

er e

dge



between group

0.6m0.6m

Figure 45 Minimum path width recommended for unsegregated shared use (low activity)

Pedestrian Level of Service

Low cyclist activity: one cyclist passing

The assessment in Figure 47 shows the pedestrian Level of Service, taking into account the minimum standard of space required for two cyclist passing.

The Level of Service assessment suggests that there is suffi cient space along most of the route at peak times to accommodate a shared use facility with low levels of cyclist activity.

A Open

B Impeded

C Constrained

D Congested

E Crowded

F Jammed

Level of Comfort

LoS B (Sept 2010)LoS B (Sept 2010)

Minimum Path Width RequirementShared-Use

path

ed

ge

cycl

ist

edge

zon

e0.

5m p

er e

dge

(0m

bes

ide

gras

s)

pede

stria

n ed

ge z

one

0.2`

m p

er e

dge

(0m

bes

ide

gras

s)

path

ed

ge

pede

stria

n / c

yclis

t pa

ssin

g zo

ne0.

5m p

er e

dge



between group

0.6m0.6m


pass

ing

dist

ance

1m 1m

Measuring footway width

Pavement widths for Studio Walk were obtained from on-site surveys by Atkins. The Level of Service calculation is based on the ‘worst case scenario’ for pedestrian and cyclist activity. For this reason, the minimum width of path available for users (defi ned as the pinch point) was used in the calculation, which takes into account the presence of regular benches along the route.

Measuring pedestrian fl ow

Peak 15 minute fl ow (scaled to an equivalent fl ow per unit time per unit width) have been used in all calculations.

Figure 46 Desirable minimum path width recommended for unsegregated shared use (active/high activity)

Figure 47 Pedestrian Level of Service with two cyclists passing on a weekday

Atkins Intelligent SpaceEuston Tower286 Euston TowerLondon NW1 3AT

www.intelligentspace.comwww.atkinsglobal.com

12008 Studio Walk...cloudy with light drizzle towards the end of the day. The results show Studio...

Documents

Transcript of 12008 Studio Walk...cloudy with light drizzle towards the end of the day. The results show Studio...