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 / don’t know, and 38.8% disagree

· For increased cycle parking, 52.2% of respondents agree with proposals, compared to 16.1% neither agree or disagree / don’t 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 ‘not sure’ 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 council’s 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 council’s 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 residents’ 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:

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		Don’t 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		Don’t 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 / don’t know, and 38.8% disagree

· For increased cycle parking, 52.2% of respondents agree with proposals, compared to 16.1% neither agree or disagree / don’t 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 / don’t 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 / don’t 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		Don’t 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 ‘not sure’ 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