Improving walking, cycling and accessibility on the seafront (A259)

 

Consultation report February 2021

 

Contents

 

1.      Introduction

2.      Questionnaire Survey Results

a.       Summary Questionnaire Results

b.      Methodology

c.       Full Results

3.      Summary of Open Days Feedback

4.      Summary of Stakeholder Feedback

 

 

 


 

Introduction

 

At the July 2021, Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee it was agreed to consult on proposals to improve walking, cycling and disabled access on A259 Kingsway from Fourth Avenue to Wharf Road. Proposals include improvements and extensions to pavements, extending the on-street cycle lane and improving accessibility of the area.

 

Headline consultation survey results[1]

 

Q1

Of those who responded to the consultation survey, 80.5% walk, 66.8% drive and 47.1% cycle, at least once a week in the area. Furthermore 22.8% of respondents are also regularly travelling by bus in the area.

 

Q2

Overall, 50.6% of respondents agree with proposals to widen pavements in the area and 66.8% agree with the improvement of pedestrian crossing points.

 

Q3

For cycling proposals:

         When considering improved cycle routes, 46% of respondents agree with proposals, compared to 2.1% neither agree or disagree, and 51.7% disagree

         For improved cycle crossing points, 48.9% agree with proposals, compared to 12.3% neither agree not disagree / donít know, and 38.8% disagree

         For increased cycle parking, 52.2% of respondents agree with proposals, compared to 16.1% neither agree or disagree / donít know, and 31.6% disagree

Q4

Overall, there is a high level of agreement that there should be more public space outside businesses (56.2%) and more provision of disabled parking bays (53.8%) than for more or improved loading bays (37.1%). However in regard to the loading bay 39.8% said they nether agree nor disagree.

 

Q5

The highest single numbers of responses to this question are that proposals will improve safety for pedestrians (47.1%), cyclists (45.6%) and people with disabilities (41.9%), with high numbers of Ďnot sureí responses for all options.

 

Q6

Of all respondents, 369 (41%) people would be encouraged to use the new cycle lane, 375 (42%) would be encouraged to visit business and local amenities in the area and 374 (42%) would be encouraged to visit the beach/seafront.

1.    Full Questionnaire Results

 

Methodology

 

An information pack, including plans was sent to 8149 addresses (residential and business properties) in the immediate vicinity of the proposed improvements. People were invited to go online to give their views on proposals. Paper copies of the questionnaire were also available on request together with a freepost envelope.

 

The consultation was also promoted through the councilís social media channels, stakeholder meetings and two drop-in sessions where residents and local businesses could see and comment on the plans. These were held at the King Alfred centre, Kingsway on Saturday 4 December from 10am to 4pm and Tuesday 7 December from 12 noon to 7pm.

 

The consultation ran from 29 November 2021 to 16 January 2022.

 

A total of 897 responses were received from 842 households, with multiple members of some households making individual submissions.

342 responses were received from within the mailout area giving a response rate of 4.2%[2]. The response rate is calculated using the number of individual valid responses[3] received from households who had been sent information about the scheme.

Of the 342 respondents from within the mailout area, 261 (76.3%) said that they heard about the consultation via the information that they had received. The highest single response from all respondents was that 47.2% of respondents became aware of the consultation via social media. Social media is fast becoming the most popular way of hearing about consultations as details are easily shared and promoted. Due to the location of the scheme proposed, there is likely to be high levels of interest in the area from non-residents eg those who live elsewhere in the city and visit this popular part of the seafront area.

Q How did you hear about the survey?

 

 

No.

%[4]

I received an information leaflet

276

30.8

I read about it on the councilís website

70

7.8

I read about it on social media

423

47.2

I attended an event

17

1.9

I heard about it by word of mouth

123

0.1

I read about it in the local press

87

9.7

Other includes:

From my local councillor, through work, from a group I am a member of, from friends or family, local neighbourhood group or residentsí association

 

31

3.5

 

Several businesses and members of organisations also responded to the consultation and their responses were combined with those from individuals. Detailed submissions from key stakeholders were removed to be analysed alongside comments given in stakeholder workshops, which are presented in section 4 of this report.

Q How are you responding to this survey?

 

 

No.

%

As an individual

884

98.7

As a representative of a business, organisation or group

12

1.3

 

143 invalid responses were removed from the final results: 15 were duplicate responses ie submitted twice or more by the same person and 125 were removed as they provided an incomplete or incorrect name and/or address which was stated as a requirement within the survey.

 


Responses were received from across the city as follows:

Map

Description automatically generated

 

854 responses (95.2%) were from city residents and 4.8% 43 responses (4.8%) from residents in other, mostly neighbouring, authorities. We can see from the larger circles that higher numbers of respondents live in the vicinity of the proposals, however as noted above there is likely to be high interest in this area from across the city and beyond due to its location on the seafront and the importance of the local visitor economy.


Results

 

Q1 How often do you use these forms of transport in the area?

 

 

Every day, or nearly every day

2-3 days a week

Once a week

Less often but at least once a month

Less than once a month

Never

 

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

411

48.1

178

20.8

99

11.6

83

9.7

46

5.4

38

4.4

Cycle[5]

107

12.6

203

23.9

90

10.6

97

11.4

107

12.6

246

28.9

Bus

9

1.1

74

9.0

99

12.1

164

20.0

227

27.8

245

30.0

Car/ van as driver [6]

193

22.5

253

29.5

128

14.9

82

9.5

66

7.7

137

15.9

Car/ van as passenger

32

4.2

89

11.6

128

16.8

110

14.4

183

24.0

222

29.1

Motorcycle/ moped

7

0.9

10

1.3

9

1.2

8

1.0

15

2.0

717

93.6

Wheelchair/ mobility scooter

5

0.7

5

0.7

7

0.9

4

0.5

4

0.5

739

96.7

Taxi/ Private Hire

3

0.4

16

2.0

47

6.0

108

13.7

300

38.1

313

39.8

Community Transport[7]

1

0.1

2

0.3

4

0.5

4

0.5

11

1.4

742

97.1

Other

10

1.6

6

1.0

3

0.5

6

1.0

11

1.8

580

94.2

 

Other includes electric scooter, running or jogging, roller-skating or skateboarding, adapted disability vehicles or blue badge vehicles, patient transport services and trains in the surrounding area. The graphs below show differences between those who eg cycle regularly and not so regularly.[8]

 

 

 

688 respondents (80.5%) walk in the area on a regular basis, compared to 574 (66.8%) regular car drivers and 400 (47.1%) cyclists.

 

 

Q2 To what extent do you agree with these proposals that aim to improve walking and moving around the area?

 

The following question asks about proposals that aim to provide improvements for walking and moving around the area. Results are given for all respondents and then by mode used.

 

 

 

 

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Donít know

 

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Widen pavements

321

36.0

130

14.6

96

10.8

94

10.5

247

27.7

4

0.4

Improve pedestrian crossing points

342

38.6

250

28.2

114

12.9

61

6.9

114

12.9

6

0.7

 

 

Overall, 50.6% of respondents agree[9] with proposals to widen pavements in the area while 66.8% agree with the improvement of pedestrian crossing points.

 

Q2a Proposals to improve walking and moving around the area by main mode used

 

Widen Pavements:

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

256

37.4

98

14.3

77

11.3

66

9.6

183

26.8

4

0.6

Less often

48

37.2

16

12.4

12

9.3

20

15.5

33

25.6

0

0

Never

3

7.9

6

15.8

2

5.3

5

13.2

22

57.9

0

0

Cycle

Once a week or more

238

59.6

60

15.0

23

5.8

20

5.0

57

14.3

1

0.3

Less often

56

27.7

27

13.4

20

9.9

22

10.9

77

38.1

0

0

Never

23

9.4

29

11.9

43

17.6

47

19.3

100

41

2

0.8

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

130

22.8

82

14.4

67

11.8

76

13.3

212

37.2

3

0.5

Less often

85

57.4

21

14.2

13

8.8

10

6.8

19

12.8

0

0

Never

89

65.4

20

14.7

11

8.1

7

5.1

9

6.6

0

0

Bus

Once a week or more

63

34.6

22

12.1

25

13.7

16

8.8

55

30.2

1

0.5

Less often

146

37.5

66

17.0

37

9.5

39

10.0

100

25.7

1

0.3

Never

112

35.0

42

13.1

34

10.6

39

12.2

91

28.4

2

0.6

 

 

Respondents who say they walk regularly in the area tend to agree with proposals to widen pavements (over 53%), rising to 74.6% of regular cyclists. 37.2% of regular drivers agree that pavements should be widened, with 11.8% unsure.

 

Improved pedestrian crossing points by main mode used

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

267

39.3

193

28.4

88

13

45

6.6

82

12.1

4

0.6

Less often

56

43.4

33

25.6

15

11.6

9

7

16

12.4

0

0

Never

5

13.2

12

31.6

5

13.2

3

7.9

12

31.6

1

2.6

Cycle

Once a week or more

230

57.9

86

21.7

33

8.3

14

3.5

31

7.8

3

0.8

Less often

54

26.9

66

32.8

26

12.9

22

10.9

32

15.9

1

0.5

Never

48

19.8

79

32.6

46

19

21

8.7

47

19.4

1

0.4

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

146

25.8

175

31

92

16.3

50

8.8

98

17.3

4

0.7

Less often

84

57.1

38

25.9

10

6.8

4

2.7

10

6.8

1

0.7

Never

95

69.3

26

19

8

5.8

4

2.9

3

2.2

1

0.7

Bus

Once a week or more

71

39.2

46

25.4

28

15.5

8

4.4

27

14.9

1

0.6

Less often

147

38.1

126

32.6

50

13.0

25

6.5

36

9.3

2

0.5

Never

124

38.9

78

24.5

36

11.3

28

8.8

50

15.7

3

0.9

 

 

 

Respondents who regularly walk (67.7%) or cycle (79.6%) agree with the proposal to improve pedestrian crossing points. Regular drivers also agree with this proposal (55.8%).

 

 

Q3 To what extent do you agree with these proposals that aim to improve cycling in the area?

 

 

 

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Donít know

 

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Improved cycle routes

348

39.1

61

6.9

19

2.1

77

8.7

383

43.0

2

0.2

Improved cycle crossing points

332

37.5

101

11.4

96

10.8

69

7.8

274

31.0

13

1.5

Increased cycle parking

287

32.4

175

19.8

132

14.9

54

6.1

226

25.5

11

1.2

 

 

For cycling proposals:

         When considering improved cycle routes, 46% of respondents agree with proposals, compared to 2.1% neither agree or disagree, and 51.7% disagree

         For improved cycle crossing points, 48.9% agree with proposals, compared to 12.3% neither agree not disagree / donít know, and 38.8% disagree

         For increased cycle parking, 52.2% of respondents agree with proposals, compared to 16.1% neither agree or disagree / donít know, and 31.6% disagree

 

 

 

 

Reactions to these proposals for cycling improvements were also explored to determine levels of agreement for proposals by different transport modes used in the area (Q3a), by disability (Q3b) and by gender (Q3c).

 

Q3a proposals that aim to improve cycling in the area by main mode used

 

Improved cycle routes by main mode used:

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

273

40.1

46

6.8

13

1.9

57

8.4

290

42.6

2

0.3

Less often

55

42.6

11

8.5

3

2.3

10

7.8

50

38.8

0

0

Never

3

7.9

1

2.6

1

2.6

6

15.8

27

71.1

0

0

Cycle

Once a week or more

273

68.6

29

7.3

4

1

14

3.5

78

19.6

0

0

Less often

60

29.9

15

7.5

2

1

17

8.5

107

53.2

0

0

Never

11

4.5

12

4.9

9

3.7

40

16.4

170

69.7

2

0.8

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

136

24.0

40

7.1

16

2.8

55

9.7

320

56.4

0

0

Less often

100

67.6

10

6.8

1

0.7

13

8.8

24

16.2

0

0

Never

96

70.1

9

6.6

1

0.7

6

4.4

23

16.8

2

1.5

Bus

Once a week or more

58

32.0

17

9.4

4

2.2

18

9.9

84

46.4

0

0

Less often

166

42.7

28

7.2

8

2.1

33

8.5

153

39.3

1

0.3

Never

124

38.9

16

5.0

7

2.2

26

8.2

145

45.5

1

0.3

 

 

 

 

319 (46.9%) respondents that walk regularly in the area agree with the proposals to improve cycle routes, along with to 302 (75.9%) respondents that cycle regularly in the area. . In terms of respondents that drive regularly in the area, this is 31.1% (176 respondents)

 

Improved cycle crossing points by main mode used

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

263

38.8

78

11.5

77

11.4

45

6.6

202

29.8

12

1.8

Less often

50

38.8

16

12.4

14

10.9

12

9.3

37

28.7

0

0

Never

3

8.1

2

5.4

1

2.7

7

18.9

24

64.9

0

0

Cycle

Once a week or more

258

65.2

53

13.4

19

4.8

11

2.8

53

13.4

2

0.5

Less often

56

28

19

9.5

29

14.5

24

12

70

35

2

1

Never

13

5.4

20

8.3

40

16.5

30

12.4

131

54.1

8

3.3

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

126

22.4

71

12.6

72

12.8

54

9.6

230

40.9

10

1.8

Less often

95

64.6

14

9.5

12

8.2

9

6.1

17

11.6

0

0

Never

95

69.3

12

8.8

8

5.8

4

2.9

15

10.9

3

2.2

Bus

Once a week or more

57

31.7

24

13.3

18

10.0

12

6.7

68

37.8

1

0.6

Less often

154

40.0

54

14.0

46

11.9

31

8.1

93

24.2

7

1.8

Never

121

37.9

23

7.2

32

10.0

26

8.2

112

35.1

5

1.6

 

 

 

When respondents are split by frequency of mode usage results are as follows

         311 (78.6%) regular cyclists agree with proposals to improve cycle crossing points

         For those regularly walking in the area 50.3% (341 respondents) agree with proposals to improve cycle crossings, compared to 13.2% neither agree or disagree / donít know, and 36.4% disagree

         For regular car drivers35% (197 respondents) agree with proposals to improve cycle crossings, with 14.6% neither agree or disagree / donít know, and 50.5% disagree

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase cycle parking by main mode used:

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

232

34.3

131

19.4

109

16.1

35

5.2

161

23.8

8

1.2

Less often

42

32.6

29

22.5

17

13.2

8

6.2

32

24.8

1

0.8

Never

1

2.6

4

10.5

3

7.9

6

15.8

23

60.5

1

2.6

Cycle

Once a week or more

224

56.7

82

20.8

37

9.4

8

2.0

38

9.6

6

1.5

Less often

47

23.5

46

23.0

32

16.0

19

9.5

55

27.5

1

0.5

Never

12

4.9

34

13.9

55

22.5

23

9.4

117

48.0

3

1.2

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

115

20.4

101

17.9

107

19.0

41

7.3

193

34.2

7

1.2

Less often

83

56.5

30

20.4

14

9.5

6

4.1

13

8.8

1

0.7

Never

74

54.0

36

26.3

7

5.1

5

3.6

12

8.8

3

2.2

Bus

Once a week or more

50

27.8

45

25.0

27

15.0

7

3.9

50

27.8

1

0.6

Less often

142

36.9

75

19.5

62

16.1

25

6.5

76

19.7

5

1.3

Never

95

29.8

55

17.2

43

13.5

22

6.9

99

31.0

5

1.6

 

 

 

 

When looking at respondents by frequency of mode use, views on the proposals to increase cycle parking are as follows:

         306 (77.5%) regular cyclists agree, compared to10.9% neither agree or disagree / don't know and 11.6% disagree

         For regular walkers 363 respondents (53.7%) agree with this proposal, compared to 17.3% neither agree or disagree / don't know and 29% disagree

         216 (38.3%) of regular car drivers agree with the proposal to increase cycle parking, with 20.2% neither agree or disagree / don't know and 41.3% disagree

 

 

 


 

Q4 To what extent do you agree with these proposals that aim to improve access to and within the area?

 

 

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Donít know

 

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

More provision of disabled parking bays

217

24.4

261

29.4

228

25.6

56

6.3

100

11.2

27

3.0

More/ improved loading bays

105

11.9

223

25.2

352

39.8

82

9.3

92

10.4

31

3.5

More public space outside businesses (eg for seating)

243

27.4

256

28.8

163

18.4

97

10.9

115

13.0

14

1.6

 

 

 

Overall, there is a high level of agreement that there should be more public space outside businesses (56.2%) and more provision of disabled parking bays (53.8%) than for more or improved loading bays (37.1%). However in regard to the loading bay 39.8% said they nether agree nor disagree.

 

 

Q4a Proposals that aim to improve access to and within the area by main mode used

 

More provision of disabled bays by main mode used

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

159

23.3

194

28.4

189

27.7

45

6.6

75

11

20

2.9

Less often

30

23.6

43

33.9

27

21.3

9

7.1

12

9.4

6

4.7

Never

16

42.1

7

18.4

5

13.2

0

0

10

26.3

0

0

Cycle

Once a week or more

118

29.6

115

28.8

113

28.3

17

4.3

24

6

12

3

Less often

32

16

57

28.5

58

29

14

7

30

15

9

4.5

Never

49

20.2

72

29.6

53

21.8

23

9.5

42

17.3

4

1.6

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

95

16.7

161

28.3

160

28.2

50

8.8

87

15.3

15

2.6

Less often

54

37

48

32.9

29

19.9

5

3.4

6

4.1

4

2.7

Never

56

40.9

37

27

33

24.1

1

0.7

2

1.5

8

5.8

Bus

Once a week or more

41

22.8

54

30

46

25.6

9

5

20

11.1

10

5.6

Less often

99

25.6

118

30.5

99

25.6

24

6.2

36

9.3

11

2.8

Never

77

24

89

27.7

83

25.9

23

7.2

43

13.4

6

1.9

 

 

 

 

256 regular car drivers (45%) agree with the proposal to provide more disabled bays and to 233 regular cyclists (58.4%) and 353 (57.5%) regular pedestrians. Across all regular mode users there are high levels of neither agree or disagree / don't know responses (30.6% of regular walkers, 31.3% of regular cyclists and 30.8% of regular drivers).

 

More/ improved loading bays by main mode used

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

76

11.2

168

24.8

274

40.0

64

9.4

72

10.6

24

3.5

Less often

15

11.7

35

27.3

52

40.6

10

7.8

10

7.8

6

4.7

Never

2

5.3

8

21.1

15

39.5

5

13.2

8

21.1

0

0

Cycle

Once a week or more

63

15.8

105

26.4

158

39.7

31

7.8

29

7.3

12

3.0

Less often

17

8.6

44

22.2

86

43.4

19

9.6

24

12.1

8

4.0

Never

17

7

56

23

96

39.5

30

12.3

36

14.8

8

3.3

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

42

7.4

136

24.1

225

39.8

68

12.0

78

13.8

16

2.8

Less often

29

19.7

39

26.5

59

40.1

7

4.8

8

5.4

5

3.4

Never

29

21.3

35

25.7

52

38.2

6

4.4

4

2.9

10

7.4

Bus

Once a week or more

23

12.8

39

21.8

79

44.1

9

5.0

21

11.7

8

4.5

Less often

46

11.9

112

29.0

149

38.6

35

9.1

33

8.5

11

2.8

Never

36

11.3

72

22.6

124

38.9

38

11.9

37

11.6

12

3.8

 

 

As with the previous proposal for more provision of disabled bays, there are high levels of neither agree nor disagree / don't know responses for increasing or improving loading bays, and this is true across all frequent mode users (43.5% of regular pedestrians, 42.7% of regular cyclists and 42.6% of regular car drivers).

 

Aside from these figures levels of agreement are higher than levels of disagreement for this proposal; 36% of regular pedestrians, 42.2% of regular cyclists and 31.5% regular car drivers agree

 

 

More public space outside businesses (eg for seating) by main mode used

 

Mode

Frequency

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

193

28.4

199

29.3

118

17.4

70

10.3

90

13.2

10

1.5

Less often

35

27.1

40

31

24

18.6

13

10.1

14

10.9

3

2.3

Never

2

5.3

9

23.7

11

28.9

7

18.4

9

23.7

0

0

Cycle

Once a week or more

167

42

125

31.4

47

11.8

22

5.5

30

7.5

7

1.8

Less often

42

20.9

55

27.4

42

20.9

24

11.9

35

17.4

3

1.5

Never

29

11.9

62

25.5

60

24.7

44

18.1

45

18.5

3

1.2

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

110

19.5

157

27.8

118

20.9

72

12.7

102

18.1

6

1.1

Less often

58

39.2

47

31.8

23

15.5

10

6.8

7

4.7

3

2

Never

62

45.3

42

30.7

15

10.9

10

7.3

3

2.2

5

3.6

Bus

Once a week or more

46

25.4

60

33.1

28

15.5

17

9.4

24

13.3

6

3.3

Less often

115

29.7

116

30.0

68

17.6

41

10.6

44

11.4

3

0.8

Never

82

25.7

80

25.1

67

21.0

39

12.2

46

14.4

5

1.6

 

 

When looking at respondents by frequency of mode use, views on the proposal to provide more public space are as follows, in all instances the highest proportion of responses agree with this proposal.

         292 (73.4%) regular cyclists agree, compared to 13.6% neither agree or disagree / don't know and 13.0% disagree

         For regular walkers 392 respondents (57.7%) agree with this proposal, compared to 18.9% neither agree or disagree / don't know and 23.5% disagree

         267 (47.3%) regular car drivers agree with the proposal to increase public space, with 22% neither agree or disagree / don't know and 30.8% disagree

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q4b Proposals that aim to improve access to and within the area by disability

 

Disability

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Don't know

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Disabled Parking Bays

Yes, a little

25

28.4

23

26.1

15

17

5

5.7

18

20.5

2

2.3

Yes, a lot

30

56.6

8

15.1

6

11.3

2

3.8

5

9.4

2

3.8

All Disability

55

39.0

31

22.0

21

14.9

7

5.0

23

16.3

4

2.8

No

153

22.5

208

30.6

189

27.8

43

6.3

64

9.4

22

3.2

More / Improved Loading Bays

Yes, a little

11

12.6

18

20.7

31

35.6

8

9.2

16

18.4

3

3.4

Yes, a lot

6

11.3

9

17

24

45.3

4

7.5

6

11.3

4

7.5

All Disability

17

12.1

27

19.3

55

39.3

12

8.6

22

15.7

7

5.0

No

85

12.6

182

26.9

268

39.6

61

9

58

8.6

22

3.3

More Public Space Outside Businesses

Yes, a little

20

23

18

20.7

19

21.8

14

16.1

15

17.2

1

1.1

Yes, a lot

8

15.1

19

35.8

16

30.2

6

11.3

3

5.7

1

1.9

All Disability

28

20.0

37

26.4

35

25.0

20

14.3

18

12.9

2

1.4

No

210

31

207

30.5

112

16.5

64

9.4

75

11.1

10

1.5

 

86 (61%) respondents with a disability agree with the proposal aim to increase provision of disabled parking bays, 30 (21.3%) disagree. 44 (31.4%) respondents with a disability agree with the proposal of more provision/improved loading bays, and 34 (24.3%) disagree and 62 (44.3%) neither agree nor disagree/ are not sure.

65 (46.4%) respondents with a disability agree with the proposal to create more public space outside businesses, 38 (27.2%) Disagree and 35 (25%) nether agree nor disagree.

 

Those respondents with disabilities are supportive of increased disabled parking bays than those without (over 70% for those with more severe disabilities). Over 50% of respondents without a disability are in favour of this proposal. Respondents without a disability are also supportive of increased public space and improved provision of loading bays.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q5 Do you think these proposals will improve safety for:

 

 

Yes

No

Not sure

 

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Pedestrians

419

47.1

377

42.4

94

10.6

Cyclists

404

45.6

370

41.8

112

12.6

People with disabilities

370

41.9

293

33.1

221

25.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The highest single numbers of responses to this question are that proposals will improve safety for pedestrians (47.1%), cyclists (45.6%) and people with disabilities (41.9%), with high numbers of Ďnot sureí responses for all options.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q5a Do you think these proposals will make it safer - by main transport modes used

 

Safety for pedestrians by main mode used

 

Mode

Frequency

Yes

No

Not Sure

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

326

47.8

294

43.1

62

9.1

Less often

63

49.2

43

33.6

22

17.2

Never

6

15.8

27

71.1

5

13.2

Cycle

Once a week or more

290

72.9

85

21.4

23

5.8

Less often

77

38.3

102

50.7

22

10.9

Never

38

15.5

164

66.9

43

17.6

Car (as driver)

Once a week or more

180

31.7

309

54.4

79

13.9

Less often

111

75.0

32

21.6

5

3.4

Never

109

79.6

22

16.1

6

4.4

Bus

Once a week or more

77

43.0%

84

46.9%

18

10.1%

Less often

190

48.8%

153

39.3%

46

11.8%

Never

152

47.4%

139

43.3%

30

9.3%

 

 

 

72.9% of regular cyclists and 47.8% of regular pedestrians (the highest single number of responses for these groups) state that they feel that the proposals will improve safety for pedestrians.

 

Safety for cyclists by main mode used:

 

Type of group

Disability

Yes

No

Not Sure

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

Walk

Once a week or more

318

47.0

276

40.8

83

12.3

Less often

61

47.3

49

38.0

19

14.7

Never

5

13.2

27

71.1

6

15.8

Cycle

Once a week or more

283

71.

94