Traffic calming in historic core zones: High Street Route, Shrewsbury

Transcription

1 TRANSPORT RESEARCH LABORATORY Traffic calming in historic core zones: High Street Route, Shrewsbury Prepared for Charging and Local Transport Division, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions A Wheeler TRL REPORT 374

2 First Published 1999 ISSN Copyright Transport Research Laboratory This report has been produced by the Transport Research Laboratory, under/as part of a Contract placed by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. Any views expressed are not necessarily those of the Department. TRL is committed to optimising energy efficiency, reducing waste and promoting recycling and re-use. In support of these environmental goals, this report has been printed on recycled paper, comprising 100% post-consumer waste, manufactured using a TCF (totally chlorine free) process. Transport Research Foundation Group of Companies Transport Research Foundation (a company limited by guarantee) trading as Transport Research Laboratory. Registered in England, Number TRL Limited. Registered in England, Number Registered Offices: Old Wokingham Road, Crowthorne, Berkshire, RG45 6AU.

3 CONTENTS Page Executive Summary 1 1 Introduction 3 2 The Shrewsbury historic core zone Scheme context The High Street route scheme Route description The scheme Description of Phases 1/2 5 3 Scheme monitoring Traffic flows and speeds Video filming and analysis Vehicle and pedestrian counts Parking activity Public opinion surveys 24 4 Results Traffic flows and speeds Automatic traffic counts Manual traffic counts Speeds Pedestrian activity Parking activity Turnover Length of stay Occupancy Public opinion surveys Sample profile Summary of results Comparison with results of the After 1 survey Shropshire County Council survey Accidents 33 5 Summary and conclusions 33 6 Acknowledgements 34 7 References 34 Appendix A 35 Appendix B 38 Abstract 41 Related publications 41 iii

4 iv

5 Executive Summary In 1987, the English Historic Towns Forum (EHTF) was formed to promote and reconcile prosperity and conservation in historic towns. Over 50 towns are currently members of the Forum, represented through their local authorities. Supported by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) and English Heritage, one of the Forum s initiatives is to promote a more environmentally sensitive and higher quality approach to the design of traffic measures in historic towns. Local authorities were invited to submit proposals for projects to be studied, from which four pilot projects were chosen: in Bury St Edmunds, Halifax, Lincoln and Shrewsbury. Traffic management and traffic calming measures were to be introduced in the towns Historic Core Zones. The schemes aimed to be effective in meeting their traffic objectives whilst also achieving a significant improvement in the townscape in those areas. A key objective was to minimise the use and visual impact of road signs, lines, road humps and visually intrusive measures, while still meeting the traffic management or calming objectives of each scheme. Another important feature of the projects, forming part of the relevant local authorities capital programmes, was the use of much higher standards of design, materials, finishes and implementation than is normally associated with such schemes. The Transport Research Laboratory was commissioned by DETR s Charging and Local Transport Division to monitor the schemes for their effect on vehicle speeds and flows, pedestrian behaviour and parking activity. Following the installation of each scheme, an on-street questionnaire survey was also undertaken to determine public attitudes. Phases 1 and 2 of a 3-phase scheme in Shrewsbury town centre are the subject of this report. The scheme forms part of an Integrated Transport Plan for Shrewsbury by Shropshire County Council and Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council, to make the town a more pleasant place in which to live and work. It is aimed to make the town centre, with its many historic buildings, more attractive to shoppers and visitors - the area has suffered the environmental ill-effects of traffic and pedestrian-traffic conflict, threatening the economic health of local retailers and small businesses. The scheme lies on a through route (known as the High Street Route ) between the English and Welsh Bridges over the River Severn. Phases 1 and 2 cover the one-way section of the route and were completed by May Before installation of Phase 1, the one-way and two-way sections of the route were carrying about 7,000 and 10,000-13,000 vehicles per day respectively. The main features of the scheme are widened footways, a narrowed carriageway, less obtrusive signing and removal of yellow lines, frequent pedestrian crossovers, and bays for buses, deliveries, taxis and disabled drivers. Stone surfacing, using different types and sized blocks/slabs for the footways, carriageway, pedestrian crossovers and vehicle bays, is a major feature. 20mph zone status is envisaged for the scheme. Monitoring of traffic and pedestrian movements, vehicle speeds and parking activity was carried out before scheme installation, and repeated, together with an on-street survey of public opinions, following the introduction of Phase 1 and then Phase 2. With Phases 1 and 2 present, traffic flow through the scheme was reduced by nearly 30%. Weekday daytime mean and 85th percentile speeds within the scheme (17mph and 21mph respectively prior to Phase 1) fell by about 7mph. Total pedestrian crossing movements within the area of the scheme were little changed but there was some redistribution after Phase 2. Over half of the pedestrians used the new crossovers. Within the area of the scheme, general parking was mostly prohibited before and after scheme installation, but the scheme involved some redistribution of loading areas and taxi parking and the introduction of bays for disabled car users (orange badge holders) and for buses. Overall, there was little parking outside these bays within the area of the scheme before and after scheme installation. Illegal parking outside the special bays was largely eliminated (in any case, parking in the narrowed carriageway would have caused an obstruction). There was, however, some parking in the new bus bays. Parking increased in the loading areas (particularly in the evening when general parking was allowed in them), probably due to the provision of bays in place of the original relaxation of loading restrictions along a straight kerb. The bays for disabled car users were about two-thirds occupied for much of the day. Public reaction to the extended scheme seemed less favourable than it had been after the introduction of Phase 1, 18 months previously. Less than a third of the 200 respondents were satisfied overall with the scheme, compared to nearly a half with Phase 1, although a further third had no feeling either way. Adverse comments mainly came from cyclists (though there were few of them) and pedestrians. In general people believed the changes had been good for pedestrians, shoppers, children and elderly people but bad for drivers, cyclists and shopkeepers. Suggestions for improvements to the scheme mainly related to the surface of the carriageway, to traffic management and to pedestrian facilities. Respondents were divided on whether the scheme had improved the environmental impact of traffic but nearly three-quarters thought that the town centre s appearance had been improved. Opinions were also divided on the parking arrangements. Cyclists who had ridden along the street before scheme installation felt that conditions had worsened, the main problems being poor ride comfort and tyre grip, and the narrow carriageway. The views of disabled people and others with walking difficulties were broadly similar to those of other respondents, although it should be noted that they were not asked about specific measures. 1

6 2

7 1 Introduction In 1987, the English Historic Towns Forum (EHTF) was formed to promote and reconcile prosperity and conservation in historic towns. Over 50 towns are currently members of the Forum, represented through their local authorities. There is also a large number of associate members representing other local authorities, the private sector, civic societies and academic institutions. One of the initiatives in which the Forum has been involved is to promote a more environmentally sensitive and higher quality approach to the design of traffic measures in historic towns. To further this aim, the Forum formed a Traffic Measures Group, comprising representatives of nine historic towns (Lincoln, Shrewsbury, Bury St Edmunds, Wells, Lewes, Canterbury, Chester, Halifax and Cirencester), the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) and English Heritage, to share good practice on the design of traffic management measures. The initiative is also supported by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Civic Trust and the CSS. Local authorities were invited to submit proposals for projects to be studied, co-ordinated by the Traffic Measures Group. From seven submissions, four pilot projects - in Bury St Edmunds, Halifax, Lincoln and Shrewsbury - were chosen. Traffic management and calming measures were to be introduced in the towns Historic Core Zones. The schemes aimed to be effective in meeting their traffic objectives whilst also achieving a significant improvement in the townscape in those areas. A key objective was to minimise the use and visual impact of road signs, lines, road humps and visually intrusive measures, while still meeting the traffic management or calming objectives of each scheme. Another important feature of the projects was that they would involve the use of much higher standards of design, materials, finishes and implementation than is normally associated with such schemes. The Historic Core Zones initiative has the support of DETR s Charging and Local Transport Division, which commissioned the Transport Research Laboratory to monitor the four pilot projects. Results from the schemes in Halifax and Lincoln have already been reported by TRL (Wheeler, 1997; TRL, 1997; Taylor, 1998) and the whole Historic Core Zones project has been summarised by the EHTF. The first two phases of a three-phase scheme to improve part of Shrewsbury town centre, which forms an element of the Integrated Transport Plan for the town, are the subject of the present report. The features of the scheme are summarised in Section 2; the remainder of the report describes the monitoring and the results. 2 The Shrewsbury historic core zone 2.1 Scheme context The medieval core of Shrewsbury lies within a loop of the River Severn (Figure 1). It is an important commercial and business centre, as well as home to over 1000 households, and there is a wide range of shops and places of historic interest. There has been mounting concern about the effects of increasing motor traffic in the town, with the attendant problems of congestion, pollution, noise and accidents; it was hoped to tackle these problems in ways that would improve the appearance and viability of the town. A study of the transport needs of Shrewsbury was therefore carried out by Shropshire County Council and Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council, leading to the production of the Integrated Transport Plan in This recognised the need to plan for all types of transport - cycling, walking, public transport and taxis - as well as for cars. The aim was to reduce reliance upon private motor vehicles, whilst maintaining and improving access to the town centre. The Plan dealt with issues such as park and ride, car parking, bus priority measures, cycling and pedestrian facilities, a new North West relief road (which if built, will complete a distributor ring road around the town, taking through traffic out of the town centre), and improvements to the town centre itself. A major element in improving the town centre was the upgrading of the High Street Route, a continuous length of street, although it was felt that the Historic Core Zone would eventually include the whole of the town centre within the river loop. The County and Borough Councils commissioned consultants to draw up a concept design for the High Street to show how it could be made safer and more attractive, balancing the needs of pedestrians, cars, cyclists, buses and delivery vehicles. The resulting plans proposed wider footways, better crossing facilities and special facilities for buses, taxis, deliveries and disabled drivers. The scheme is described in more detail in Section The High Street Route scheme Route description The route, historically the east-west thoroughfare through the town, links the English and Welsh Bridges over the River Severn, situated on opposite sides of the river loop (Figure 1). From English Bridge in the east, the phased improvements affect Wyle Cop, High Street, Mardol Head, Shoplatch, Bellstone and Barker Street. The route is one-way westbound along the western end of Wyle Cop, the High Street, Mardol Head and Shoplatch. English Bridge-Barker Street/Welsh Bridge traffic can avoid the one-way section by way of Beeches Lane and Town Walls, but a significant flow of traffic from north of the town centre joins the route from Dogpole, the junction of which is at the start of the one-way section. The only significant pedestrian facility before scheme installation was a pelican crossing on Barker Street. The Square opens out on to the High Street and the parallel Market Street/Princess Street. These areas were improved in tandem with the High Street Route scheme (The Square by the Borough Council), but were not included in the monitoring. Prior to scheme installation, weekday traffic volumes exceeded 13,000 vehicles per day (vpd) on the two-way section of Wyle Cop, 7,000 vpd on High Street/Mardol Head/Shoplatch and 10,000 vpd on Barker Street. Along 3

8 4 Figure 1 Sketch map of Shrewsbury town centre showing location of the High Street Route (not all roads shown)

9 most of the High Street Route, on-street parking was prohibited at all times and loading/unloading was prohibited during the working day (and banned completely near Pride Hill). Other parking arrangements comprised: 1 no parking Monday-Saturday (High Street, Shoplatch and Bellstone); 2 marked loading bays (Wyle Cop, High Street, Bellstone); 3 marked bus bays (Wyle Cop, High Street, Shoplatch, Barker Street); 4 one hour voucher parking (Wyle Cop, Shoplatch); 5 taxi rank (High Street near The Square); 6 off-street parking in Barker Street (short-stay car parks). Parking arrangements after installation of Phases 1/2 are discussed in Section The main retail area, comprising three shopping centres, lies between Pride Hill and Smithfield Road. The main shopping streets are Castle Street/Pride Hill (with pedestrian access to the shopping centres), Mardol Head/ Shoplatch and the High Street. High pedestrian flows thus result - the 12 hour flow ( hrs) totalling 27,000 across the High Street, Mardol Head and Shoplatch in November 1995 before scheme installation. Figure 2 shows views of the route before scheme installation, illustrating some of the prevailing problems The scheme The extent of each phase of the scheme (shown in Figure 3) is as follows: Phase 1: the High Street from The Square to Pride Hill, and Mardol Head (completed May 1996); Phase 2: extension of the scheme eastwards along the High Street to the Wyle Cop/Dogpole junction and along Shoplatch to its junction with Bellstone (completed June 1997); Phase 3: further extension along Wyle Cop and Bellstone/Barker Street (not yet installed - subject to finalisation of design and availability of funding). Phases 1 and 2 cover the one-way section of the Route, and Phase 3 will cover the two-way sections. The main features of the whole scheme are: 1 widened footways, with carriageway width reduced to 3.5m along the one-way section and 6.0m along the two-way sections; 2 uncontrolled pedestrian crossovers with dropped kerbs and tactile paving; 3 separate loading bays, bus bays and a taxi bay, and parking spaces for disabled car users (orange badge holders); 4 restricted zone order (removing need for visually intrusive yellow lines); 5 smaller, non-illuminated signs, on buildings and bollards wherever possible, to reduce visual intrusion; 6 stone surfacing throughout in Phases 1 and 2; Phase 3 not yet finalised. Different types of stone were chosen for the carriageway, vehicle bays, pedestrian crossovers and the footways (see Section 2.2.3). Although 20mph zone status was envisaged for the scheme, no road humps or other raised areas were planned; it was felt that these would detract from the traditional appearance of the street, and reduce the comfort of bus passengers and cyclists. No daytime general parking is available, other than for disabled people. On Barker Street and Bellstone (Phase 3 - see Figure 4), the extra road width could provide the opportunity for tree planting and landscaping to help screen less attractive features of the street. The scheme was the subject of considerable ongoing consultation with the public, traders and other interested parties, and was supported by the Town Centre Manager. A number of public exhibitions were held, when publicity material was made available, and a questionnaire on the proposals was provided during the first exhibition Description of Phases 1/2 Plans of Phases 1 and 2 of the scheme are shown in Figure 5a and 5b respectively, and associated changes in parking arrangements are shown in Figure 6. The installation of Phase 2 extended the length of the scheme from 135m to 425m. General parking was prohibited throughout the area of the scheme except during the evening in the loading bays, the provision of which was doubled. Three bays for disabled car users (orange badge holders) were provided in the area of Phase 2. The outer limits of Phase 2 of the scheme are shown in Figure 7. The restricted zone signing replacing yellow lines was erected at the entry to the scheme on Wyle Cop (Figure 7, top). The exit from the scheme on Shoplatch is shown in Figure 7 (bottom). The construction materials used throughout Phases 1 and 2 of the scheme were: carriageway/bus bays basalt ( Whinstone ) setts; carriageway channels basalt (600mm/900mm long blocks); kerb York Stone (900mm long blocks); footway fine sawn York Stone flags; loading bays/pedestrian York Stone setts; crossovers/disabled car users bays tactile paving York Stone (with studs machined from the stone). Examples of these materials are shown in Figure 8. The narrowing of the carriageway to 3.5m allowed widening of the footways, and was also intended to make it easier and safer for pedestrians to cross and help discourage speeding. The basalt setts were chosen for their hard wearing qualities and to provide a colour contrast with the York Stone of the footways. A fairly smooth carriageway paviour was needed so that cyclists were not disadvantaged, but a suitable material was difficult to find, and the selected material has apparently produced a coarser surface than originally intended. At the junction with Milk Street (Figure 5b), the footway 5

10 (a) High Street looking NW, The Square on left. Illustrates the problem of narrow footways forcing pedestrians into carriageway (b) NW end of High Street from The Square. Taxi rank on left (c) Junction of High Street with Milk Street, looking SE (d) Corner of High Street (to right) and Mardol Head junction with pedestrianised Pride Hill, showing loading restrictions (e) Mardol Head, looking SW, again showing pedestrians forced into carriageway by narrow footways (f) Shoplatch, looking NE, at junction with Bellstone Figure 2 High Street, Mardol Head and Shoplatch before scheme installation 6

11 7 Figure 3 Phases of scheme on High Street Route (Implementation dates: Phase 1: May 1996; Phase 2: June 1997; Phase 3: 1999)

12 8 Figure 4 Wyle Cop, looking W (top) and Barker Street, looking SE (bottom), to be improved in Phase 3 of the scheme

13 N Pride Hill Scale: 25m Existing tree and floral area included in scheme, with new seating and paving Mardol Head Existing rough granite setts removed Footway widened and surfaced in new fine sawn York Stone Mardol Loading bay (7.30am to 6.30pm) (used for car parking in evenings) Carriageway narrowed and surfaced in cut natural basalt blocks Pedestrian crossing places with dropped kerbs Pedestrian crossing places with dropped kerbs Shoplatch Paved areas of The Square extended to meet new road line (York Stone: random bond) The Square High Street Vehicular entry to Square 9 Figure 5a Plan of Phase 1 of scheme (Plan courtesy of the Babtie Group)

14 10 Barker Street Claremont Street Disabled parking bay Mardol Head Market Hall Loading bay Loading bay Bellstone Disabled parking bay SHOPLATCH Bus bay Market Street St John s Street Figure 5b(1) Plans of Phase 2 of the scheme: Shoplatch

15 Fish Street High Street Bus Bay Loading bay Disabled parking bay The Square Cycle stands Fish Street Dogpole Disabled parking bay Milk Street Key: Wooden bollard Road sign Traffic sign Finger post Bus passenger shelter York Stone setts York Stone paving Basalt setts Yorkstone tactile paving Wyle Cop 11 Figure 5b(2) Plans of Phase 2 of the scheme: High Street

16 N Pride Hill Mardol Mardol Head Claremont Street Shoplatch The Square High Street Market Street Key: no parking any time Bellstone no parking Mon-Sat marked loading bay bus bay 1 hour voucher parking Milk Street taxi rank Figure 6a Before parking arrangements Fig 6a Before parking arrangements Pride Hill Mardol Mardol Head Claremont Street Shoplatch The Square High Street Market Street Key: no parking any time Bellstone disabled car user bay loading bay (evening parking) bus bay Milk Street Figure 6b After parking arrangements Fig. 6b After parking arrangements 12

17 Figure 7 Entrance to Phase 2 of scheme, Wyle Cop (top) and exit, Shoplatch, junction with Bellstone/Barker Street (bottom) (cf. Figure 2f) 13

18 (a) top left: York Stone (sandstone) setts for pedestrian crossover; top right: basalt setts for carriageway; centre right: basalt carriageway channel; kerb: Yoirk Stone; bottom right: fine sawn York Stone footway paving; bottom left: York Stone tactile paving (b) Contrasting basalt blocks dividing parking spaces in disabled car users bay Figure 8 Materials used in the scheme 14

19 was built out to replace a wide area of tarmac, and York Stone setts were installed across the mouth of Milk Street forming a raised area flush with the footway (Figure 9). The loading bays (Figure 10, also seen in Figure 7, top) were separated from the carriageway by York Stone kerbing laid flush to the carriageway. Loading is restricted to Monday-Saturday, allowing use for general parking at other times. A width of 2.3m was generally achieved for each bay, to allow large vehicles on the narrowed carriageway to pass easily when the bay is also occupied by a large vehicle. The Traffic Regulation Orders for the loading bays allow loading only for as long as necessary. The parking bays for disabled car users (orange badge holders) are similar in design to the loading bays, but a contrasting course of darker-coloured basalt setts was laid to divide each parking space from the next, in place of thermoplastic markings (Figure 11). Disabled motorists parking was removed from The Square. The bus bays were resurfaced in the same material as the carriageway and new bus shelters erected (Figure 12). The signing for all bays was mounted on wooden bollards, also used to denote other parking restrictions. Examples are shown in Figure 13. Eleven pedestrian crossovers were installed; examples of the features in use are shown in Figure 14. As with the footways, the York Stone of the crossovers was intended to contrast with the carriageway surface, signalling drivers to be aware of pedestrians. The material used for each crossover extends to the building line, incorporating tactile paving. The road which ran through The Square was paved over in the same York Stone slabs that surface the remainder, and access was maintained for deliveries. There had been geometric problems with long vehicles on the corner at the junction with Pride Hill (Figure 2d), involving difficulties negotiating the corner and the side of the vehicle overhanging the footway. These problems were resolved by widening the carriageway at this point (Figure 15), though space is still restricted for the largest vehicles as can be seen in the lower photograph of Figure Scheme monitoring Monitoring of the effectiveness of the scheme was carried out through the measurement of traffic flows and speeds and through video analysis of the following: 1 vehicle composition and turning counts; 2 pedestrian crossing movements; 3 parking activity; 4 sign compliance. There were 3 stages of monitoring: before scheme installation (Before); after the installation of Phase 1 (After 1); and after the installation of Phase 2 (After 2). Before monitoring related to all three phases of the scheme. An on-street survey of public attitudes to the improvements was carried out following the installation of Phase 1 and then of Phase Traffic flows and speeds Vehicle flows and speeds were recorded with automatic traffic classifiers at all monitoring stages: Before - October/ November 1995; After 1 - October 1996, and After 2 - September/October The monitoring positions, shown in Figure 16, were chosen to be where speeds were likely to be highest on the respective stretches of carriageway. Speed/ flow measurements were carried out as follows: Before After 1 After 2 Position speed flow speed flow speed flow 1Barker Street (within Phase 3) 2 Mardol Head (within Phase 1) 3 High Street (within Phase 2) 4 Wyle Cop (within Phase 3 ) It was originally intended to collect at least 7 days data at each stage, but data loss due to vandalism to the detector tubes was a persistent problem. Some After data were also lost probably as a result of parking on the tubes and slow, queueing vehicles not being detected. Because of these problems, After 2 speed data were collected using attended temporary stick-down loops during weekday shopping hours only, and direct comparisons were made with earlier data extracted for the same hours of the day. 3.2 Video filming and analysis Filming took place between 0700 and 2300 on typical weekdays at all 3 monitoring stages: Before - Monday 20 November 1995; After 1 - Thursday 17 October 1996; and After 2 - Thursday 23 October Before filming was carried out with 6 cameras giving representative coverage of the whole route affected by Phases 1-3, with After filming restricted to Phases 1 and 2. The camera positions and coverage are shown in Figure 17. After 1 filming included adjacent unaltered street sections, enabling, for example, detection of any migration of pedestrian crossing activity to the reconstructed street sections. After 2 filming covered the whole length of the High Street, Mardol Head and Shoplatch. The information obtained during video analysis of the effect of Phases 1/2 is described below Vehicle and pedestrian counts One classified traffic count was made of vehicles travelling along the High Street and approaching Mardol Head at all 3 monitoring stages (Figure 18). To count pedestrian crossing movements (defined by where they stepped off the footway), the filmed sections of street were divided into crossing points (where pedestrians would walk straight across) and zones (in which pedestrians would cross from any position at any angle). The movements counted are shown in Figure 18. No Before straight across counts, relating to the future positions of crossovers, were carried out because of the 15

20 Figure 9 Footway buildout to replace a wide area of tarmac at the junction with Milk Street, and setted area across the mouth of the junction 16

21 Figure 10 Loading bays: High Street (top), looking SE, and Mardol Head (bottom), looking NE towards Pride HIll 17

22 Figure 11 Bays for disabled car users: High Street near junction with Milk Street, looking SE (top) (cf. Figure 2c); Shoplatch, looking NE (bottom) 18

23 Figure 12 Bus bays: High Street adjacent to The Square, looking NW (top) (cf. Figure 2a); Mardol Head, looking NE (bottom) 19

24 Figure 13 Wooden bollards used for parking restriction signing: bus bay (top left); loading bay (top right); disabled car user bay (bottom) 20

25 Figure 14 Pedestrian crossovers: High Street near Pride Hill, showing car giving way (top) and at exit to scheme, looking into Bellstone/Barker Street (bottom) 21

26 Figure 15 Mardol Head and Shoplatch from Pride Hill, looking SW (cf. Figure 2d); despite widening the carriageway at the corner, space is still restricted for the largest vehicles 22

27 23 Figure 16 Speed/flow monitoring positions (automatic traffic classifier)

28 N Pride Hill Mardol Claremont Street Shoplatch Market Street Mardol Head Key: The Square After 1 and After 2 After 2 only High Street Figure 17 Camera positions and coverage (After 1 and After 2 monitoring) difficulty in judging reliably the position at which pedestrians were stepping off the pavement. The boundary of a crossing zone was defined by the approximate position of a crossover, using, for example, the nearest edge of a frontage to that position. After 1 counts were also made of pedestrians on the scheme and on the adjacent unaltered carriageway to establish: 1 changes in the total number of pedestrians crossing the length of the scheme; 2 redistribution of pedestrian flows, showing the effectiveness of the crossovers and whether, following installation of Phase 1, pedestrians preferred to cross the altered section of carriageway. Pedestrian activity by time of day was also studied: the total number of pedestrians crossing and the average crossing per hour were calculated for the periods (morning peak), , (afternoon peak) and Parking activity Compliance with parking restrictions was monitored in the Before, After 1 and After 2 periods, in areas within camera view, for the following categories of parking: 1 no parking at any time; 2 no parking on Monday-Saturday (abolished in Phase 2); 3 voucher parking (replaced by orange badge and loading bays in Phase 2); 4 loading bays; 5 a taxi rank (became a loading bay in Phase 1); 6 bus bays. Monitoring comprised: 1 turnover (number of arrivals and departures by time of day); 2 length of stay; 3 occupancy of kerbside space (whether legally or not) by parked vehicles; 4 deliveries. Turnover was determined by counting the numbers of arrivals and departures hourly. The length of stay was categorised into stays of under 3 minutes (including setdown and pickup of passengers), 3-15, 15-30, 30-45, and over 60 minutes. The occupancy was determined by counting the number of vehicles parked on the halfhour compared with the maximum number which could park in each area of parking restriction. The analyses described in this report are restricted to a Before/After comparison of the areas covered by Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the scheme together. 3.3 Public opinion surveys The surveys to establish public attitudes towards the scheme were carried out in August 1996 and November 1997, 3 months and 5 months after implementation of Phases 1 and 2 respectively. The second survey sought opinions on Phases 1 and 2 combined. For each survey, 200 street interviews took place on High Street/Mardol Head. 24

29 Limit of Phase 2 off plan Figure 18a Before vehicle and pedestrian movements Figure 18b After vehicle and pedestrian movements 25

30 Similar questionnaires were used for each survey; that for the second survey is reproduced in Appendix A. It is divided into 2 sections X and Z; section X was aimed at those who had been to the town centre before, and section Z at first-time visitors and those unaware of the existence of the scheme. Respondents were selected at random and disabled respondents were separately identified. The following topics were covered: 1 parking (directed at motor vehicle users) i.e. whether the rearranged parking provision and new restriction signing made it more or less difficult to know where and when to park and find a space; overall satisfaction with arrangements; 2 cycling (directed at anyone who had ever cycled on the scheme) i.e. the effect of the various materials used on ride comfort and tyre grip; the effect of the scheme on traffic conditions and amount of road space; 3 the effect of the scheme on the speed and volume of traffic (directed at regular visitors); 4 the effect of the changes on different road user groups, the environment and the appearance of the street; overall satisfaction with the scheme; whether the changes could be improved upon; and whether or not similar changes elsewhere would be welcomed (directed at all respondents). An independent survey was carried out in November 1997 by Shropshire County Council during a public exhibition on the Integrated Transport Plan for Shrewsbury. 70 questionnaires were completed. Respondents were asked about the effects of the High Street Route scheme on the attractiveness/appearance of the town centre, pedestrians, cyclists, shopping and traffic, and for their views on various elements of the scheme. The results are briefly summarised in Section Results 4.1 Traffic flows and speeds Automatic traffic counts Before traffic flows were measured as a by-product of speed monitoring. The problems with the data, referred to in Section 3.1, meant that the manual count data from video were more appropriate for comparing flows in the High Street before and after the introduction of Phases 1 and 2 of the scheme. A comparison of 24 hour two-way flow on Barker Street on three weekdays in October 1995 and in October 1997 shows a decrease of 46% (from 10,400 to 5,600). The majority of traffic in Barker Street travels westbound i.e. from the scheme (eastbound flow is very low) and this reduction can therefore be assumed to be attributable to the scheme. The westbound flow on English Bridge (a Shropshire County Council permanent count site) has decreased 7% (from 12,300 to 11,500) between the same periods Manual traffic counts The manual classified counts are shown as 16 hour totals in Figure 19. The total count along High Street/Mardol Head for this period was 7273 before scheme installation and 5164 after Phase 2, a 29% decrease. This change was statistically highly significant (using the paired comparison t-test between 15 minute counts). During both count periods, the proportion of HGVs was only 3%, but buses were very frequent, averaging 40 per hour (equivalent to 9% of the total flow before scheme installation and 12% after Phase 2). There were few cyclists, falling from 65 before scheme installation to only 20 after Phase 2. Figure 19 shows that, for all vehicle types, little flow reduction occurred with Phase 1 of the scheme alone Speeds Since the After 2 speed measurements were taken during weekday shopping hours only, direct comparisons have been made with Before and After 1 data collected on weekdays during the same period ( ). Before mean and 85th percentile speeds were about 17mph and 21mph respectively on both the High Street and Mardol Head (Table 1). Following installation of Phase 2, these speeds were both down by about 7mph compared to reductions of about 5mph and 1mph on Mardol Head and the High Street respectively after the installation of Phase 1. All changes were statistically significant at at least the 0.1% level. The proportion of vehicles exceeding 20mph between 1000 and 1700 hours was down from 14% on the High Street and 12% on Mardol Head before scheme installation to just 3% and 1% by the After 2 period. It should be noted that consideration of full 24 hour data (as was possible for the Before and After 1 periods) shows higher mean and 85th percentile speeds and slightly larger Table 1 Overall mean and 85th percentile speeds (mph) to 1700 hours Mean speed 85th percentile speed Before After 1 After 2 Change Change Before After 1 After 2 Change Change Site (see Figure 16) (1) (2) (3) (2)-(1) (3)-(1) (1) (2) (3) (2)-(1) (3)-(1) Mardol Head (site 2) High Street (site 3) Before period: November 1995 (Mardol Head), 15-18, 20 November 1995 (High Street); After 1 period: 7-11 October 1996; After 2 period: 29 September

31 N Mardol Pride Hill Dates of counts Before: Monday 20 November 1995 After 1: Thursday 17 October 1996 After 2: Thursday 23 October 1997 NOT TO SCALE Claremont Street Mardol Head The Square High Street Shoplatch Before After 1 After 2 Pedal cycles Motorcycles Cars LGVs HGVs Buses Figure 19 Before and After vehicle movements between 0700 and 2300 hours speed reductions than those shown in Table 1. The proportion of vehicles exceeding 20mph on Mardol Head reduced from 50% before scheme installation to 7% after Phase 1 was introduced. 4.2 Pedestrian activity Figures 20a and 20b show pedestrian movements across the High Street, Mardol Head and Shoplatch, before scheme installation and after completion of Phase 2 respectively. Key results are presented in Table 2. Since counts on Shoplatch could not be continued after 1900 due to poor visibility, 12 hour rather than 16 hour counts are shown. Whilst the total number of pedestrians observed crossing the road in the area of Phase 1/2 was down by 2%, the flow across Shoplatch increased by a quarter, possibly as a direct result of the improvements on this section. On the other hand, the number crossing the part of the High Street altered by Phase 2 improvements fell by a quarter. This section is prone to congestion, resulting from: buses occasionally not being able to enter the bus bay when occupied by unauthorised vehicles; high pedestrian flows across the central part of the scheme; and large vehicles slowly rounding the corner at Pride Hill. Over half of the pedestrians used the crossovers. The equivalent proportion for the area covered by Phase 1, in the After 1 period, was 28%. The number of wheelchair users who crossed within the area of the scheme was 12 (Before) and 17 (After 2), of which 14 used the crossovers. Before and After 1 counts carried out on the section of the High Street unaltered by Phase 1 showed some migration of pedestrian crossing activity on to the scheme following implementation. The proportion of pedestrians crossing the street within the limits of Phase 1 increased Table 2 Summary of pedestrian movements crossing the road within the area of the scheme (Percentage of total in brackets) Movement Before After 2 Change Across Shoplatch (altered in Phase 2) 4186 (16%) 5240 (20%) +25% Across area of Phase 1 of scheme ( 65%) (65%) - 2% Across section of High Street altered in Phase (20%) 3902 (15%) -26% Total 26966(100%) 26338(100%) -2% of which: On crossovers (52%) Dates: Before: Monday 20 November 1995; After 2: Thursday 23 October

32 Limit of Phase 2 off plan Figure 20a Before pedestrian movements between 0700 and 1900 hours Figure 20b After 2 pedestrian movements between 0700 and 1900 hours 28

33 from 77% to 81%, the overall redistribution of flows on the altered and unaltered sections of street being statistically significant at the 0.1% level. Figures 21 and 22 respectively show Before/After 2 total and hourly flows for all movements combined by time of day. Before and After 2 flows before 1800 were fairly similar, ranging from over 3000/h between 0900 and 1600 to just under 550/h between 0700 and Evening flows nearly doubled across Mardol Head and the High Street following scheme installation. Parking restriction Before After No parking any time Bus bays 7 15 Taxi rank 11 - Loading bays No parking hour voucher parking 15* - Orange badge holders only - 12 Total *Including space for 4 motorcycles Turnover Figures 23 and 24 respectively show the numbers of legal and illegal arrivals and departures within the area of the scheme by time of day, in the Before and After 2 periods. In the After 2 study, it was assumed that those parking in the disabled car users bays had an orange badge as it was difficult to identify this on video. Figure 21 Pedestrian movements by time of day (all movements combined) Figure 23 Parking: number of legal arrivals and departures by time of day Figure 22 Pedestrian movements by time of day (all movements combined: average per hour) 4.3 Parking activity The estimated maximum number of cars which could physically park at the kerbside in the various categories of parking restriction in the area of Phases 1 and 2 of the scheme (within camera view only) were as follows: Figure 24 Parking: number of illegal arrivals and departures by time of day 29

34 The turnover of legal parking (including deliveries) over the 16 hours observed increased from 73 to 299 arrivals/departures. This was almost certainly due to the increased provision of loading bays (resulting in more permitted general parking in the evening) and newly available bays for disabled car users. Illegal turnover fell from 1059 to 773 arrivals/departures making the total turnover very similar in the Before and After 2 periods, despite the reduction in traffic flow observed. The differences between the Before and After hourly numbers of arrivals and departures of those parking legally and illegally were both statistically significant at the 0.1% level (based on a t-test). During the After 2 period, 58% of illegal turnover was in the loading bays (with 25 spaces where cars could physically park) and 19% was in the bus bays (with 15 car spaces). Thus the remaining 23% of illegal turnover was in the areas where no parking was allowed at any time (with 66 car spaces) Length of stay Figures 25 and 26 respectively show the Before/After 2 distributions of length of stay of all legal and illegal arrivals within the area of the scheme over the 16 hour observation period. Figure 25 Duration of legal parking (as percentage of all legal arrivals) Figure 26 Duration of illegal parking (as percentage of all illegal arrivals) 30 The Before and After 2 distributions of the length of stay of those parking legally were similar. Those parking illegally tended to park less frequently for under 3 minutes, but the proportion of drivers parking for more than 3 minutes was up from 31% to 44% of illegal turnover; much of the increase was in the 3-15 minute category. Overall, the change in the distribution of illegal parking by duration was statistically significant at the 0.1% level Occupancy The average number of vehicles observed parked on the half-hour within the area of Phase 1/2 (excluding Shoplatch and the western end of Wyle Cop) was 10.5 in the Before period and 11.6 in the After 2 period. Parking was, however, redistributed: the average number of vehicles parked where no parking was allowed at any time fell from 1.4 to 0.2, but the average number occupying areas where loading/ unloading was permitted increased from 1.0 to 9.5. This increase was due to the increased provision of loading bays after scheme installation and permitted use for general parking in the evening in the After period. Figures show the percentage of spaces occupied by time of day in: the zones where no parking was allowed at any time; the loading bays; the bus bays; and the disabled car user bays. The numbers of vehicles parked on each half-hour were combined to give the average percentage occupancy over the morning and afternoon peaks, the middle of the day and in the evening. On average, the level of illegal parking in the no parking areas within the area of the scheme (excluding the taxi rank and where loading/unloading was permitted) was low during both monitoring periods (Figure 27). The overall occupancy was reduced from 5% before scheme installation to 1% After 2, when parked vehicles outside the bays were absent for much of the day, particularly until This is not surprising given that parking on the reconstructed section other than in a bay would almost certainly cause an obstruction in the narrowed carriageway. During the Before period, the maximum occupancy was 12% during the middle of the day (coinciding with shopping hours), falling to less than 1% after scheme installation. Over the day, the loading/unloading zone (Before) and the loading bays (After 2) were on average 8% and 38% occupied respectively. Much of the increase in the After 2 period was probably due to the provision of physical, in place of marked, bays and of evening parking (Figure 28). During the evening ( ), the loading/unloading zone prior to scheme installation was 5% occupied, increasing sharply to 60% in the After 2 period. Occupancy also increased during the rest of the day, particularly during the middle of the day (11% Before, 29% After 2) and in the evening peak (10% Before, 31% After 2). Direct comparisons for bus bays could only be made for the one in the High Street (Figure 29), which was on average 28% occupied over the day (Before) and 15% (After 2). However, the number of cars physically able to (illegally) park in this bay increased from 3 to 9, thus parking by unauthorised vehicles was up in real terms in

35 Figure 27 Average percentage occupancy of NO PARKING AREAS* by time of day (on the half-hour: times are inclusive) Figure 30 Average percentage occupancy of DISABLED CAR USER BAYS by time of day (After 2 only on the half-hour: times are inclusive) the After 2 period. Occupancy was highest during the middle of the day during the Before period (40%) and during the evening following scheme installation (40%). The bus bay in Shoplatch appeared to be far less occupied by unauthorised vehicles than the bay in the High Street (After 2 period only). The bays for disabled car users (After 2 period only) were on average half-full through the day, and were most occupied during the middle of the day and in the evening, when they were at least 60% full (Figure 30). They were almost empty during the morning peak. It is not known what proportion of users were genuinely disabled, but a high traffic warden profile means that abuse is likely to be limited. Figure 28 Average percentage occupancy of LOADING BAYS by time of day (on the half-hour: times are inclusive) 4.4 Public opinion surveys The distributions of responses to each question in the After 2 survey are shown on the questionnaire in Appendix B. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the results in Appendix B. Results have also been analysed to establish statistically significant differences between responses for different sub-groups of respondents; any differences given below were significant at at least the 5% level. Differences between the results of the After 2 survey and the After 1 survey are given in Section Sample profile Just under half of the respondents were male. All but 4 respondents were at least 16 years old, with a reasonable distribution across age groups. 14% of respondents had a health problem or disability which made walking difficult, and another 4 were accompanied by someone with these problems. The most common conditions were problems with feet/legs and arthritis. Figure 29 Average percentage occupancy of HIGH STREET BUS BAY* by time of day (on the half-hour: times are inclusive) Summary of results a Demography and travelling habits of respondents (Q.1 - Q.4). Nearly two-thirds of respondents lived locally (within 5 miles). Over 60% of all respondents had come to shop or work. Over 70% were regular visitors to Shrewsbury (at least once a month) though 31

36 less than half of all respondents came to the town more than once a week. However, over half of those visiting the town centre less than once a month were aware of the scheme. Over 90% of regular visitors came to the town centre before scheme installation. The main travel modes to this part of Shrewsbury on the day of interview were private motor vehicle (43%), bus (23%), on foot (14%), bike (6%) and park & ride (5%). Those living locally and regular visitors were more likely than others to have walked or come by public transport and to have come to shop or work. Shoppers were more likely to be female. As would be expected, non-local people were more likely to be tourists. Those over 30 years old and non-local respondents were more likely to use a motor vehicle into town, those under 30 to cycle/walk, and the over 60s and those with walking difficulties to use public transport. b Effects of the scheme on parking (Q.A1 - Q.A5). Of those who came by motor vehicle, two-thirds used a public car park but 14% parked on a street elsewhere. However, only 2% parked within the scheme on the day of interview. Only 12 respondents had parked on the area of the scheme both before and after installation - 8 now found it harder to know where to park and 9 found it harder to find a space. Six found it no more difficult than before installation to know when to park, but the remainder did have problems. The 18 respondents who had ever parked on the scheme were somewhat divided over their satisfaction with the new parking arrangements. Those satisfied included two people with walking problems, one in a wheelchair. c Effects of the scheme on cycling (Q.A6 - Q.C4). In addition to the 12 respondents who had cycled to the town centre on the day of interview, a further 24 motor vehicle users had cycled in Shrewsbury at some time. Of these 36 respondents, 22 had cycled on the area of the scheme before and after installation. Nineteen thought that conditions for cycling had been made worse, with none thinking that conditions had improved. The biggest problems (cited by all 19 respondents) were felt to be ride comfort on the stone setts and the lack of space on the road to cycle. Fifteen thought tyre grip was poor and 12 complained about traffic conditions. d Effects of changes on various groups of people and on other factors (Q.D3 - Q.D5). Only 28% of all regular and occasional visitors were satisfied overall with the scheme but a further 35% had no feelings either way. Less than half of regular visitors thought that the scheme had benefited pedestrians crossing the road, and 28% reacted negatively. The latter included 3 out of the 4 wheelchair users. Female respondents were more divided than males on whether the scheme benefited pedestrians crossing the road; males had a more positive reaction. Those with walking difficulties were more likely to think that the changes disadvantaged elderly people. Two-thirds thought it was now easier than before scheme installation to walk on the (widened) footway. Nearly three-quarters thought that the scheme adversely affected cyclists safety and two-thirds (including 3 out of the 4 wheelchair users) thought it adversely affected drivers. The under-30s were most likely to think that the changes disadvantaged drivers. Respondents were somewhat divided about how the scheme affected children and elderly people: half thought it was good for these groups but a third and over two-fifths thought it disadvantaged children and elderly people respectively. Although two-thirds of respondents thought that the scheme benefited shoppers, over half thought that shopkeepers had been disadvantaged by it. The latter result also applied to the perceived impact on disabled people. Well under a half of respondents thought the scheme had improved the environmental impact of traffic, but 70% thought it had improved the appearance of the town centre. Nearly half of respondents perceived no change in the amount of traffic, in spite of the measured 29% decrease. Nearly a third, however, thought there had been a decrease. Those with walking difficulties were more likely to believe that traffic had increased. About half of respondents perceived that speeds had decreased, most of the rest thinking they were unchanged. Responses (concerning the present situation) of those visiting less than once a month, first-time visitors, those previously unaware of the scheme and those visiting only since installation were less clear cut, with about one quarter unsure. The pattern of responses of the remainder were somewhat less positive than those of the regular visitors. It is worth noting that people with disabilities and those accompanied by such people (determined by Q.E4 and Q.E5) gave similar responses to others - in particular regarding overall satisfaction and the impact of the scheme on the safety of crossing the road, ease of walking on the footway, on elderly people and on disabled people themselves. Views were not, however, sought on specific measures. 95% of respondents thought that the scheme would not encourage them to visit the town centre more frequently, even those who were satisfied with the scheme. All those with walking difficulties/mobility aids held this view. e Suggestions for improvements (Q.D7 Section X, Q.D2 Section Z). Only one-sixth of all respondents said they would like to see similar alterations elsewhere; twothirds would not, in particular those with walking difficulties/mobility aids and cyclists. Over 40% of respondents did not or could not suggest any improvements to the scheme, but the remainder had wide-ranging ideas, though many were suggested by only a few respondents. Nearly two-thirds of those making suggestions (31% of all respondents) criticised the surfacing, particularly that of the carriageway, though some comments were nonspecific (such as should have been left as it was ). Eight people specifically mentioned that the surface was slippery and the majority of the remainder said or implied that they wanted a smoother surface. 32