21/02/2018. How Far is it Acceptable to Walk? Introduction. How Far is it Acceptable to Walk?

Transcription

1 21/2/218 Introduction Walking is an important mode of travel. How far people walk is factor in: Accessibility/ Sustainability. Allocating land in Local Plans. Determining planning applications. Previous advice has been withdrawn. Other advice is limited. Using the National Travel Survey we provide an initial assessment how far people walk: as a single stage trip. to bus stops. to railway stations. Review of Advice & Guidance Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 Transport (2 & 21) Walking offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly those under 2km. Has been used for many years as the maximum reasonable walk distance. Deleted in 212 but the walking distance remains in common use. National Planning Policy Framework (212) No advice. Planning Practice Guidance for Transport Assessment and Statements (214) No advice. Providing for Journeys on Foot (IHT, 2) Town Centres Commuting/ school Sight-seeing Elsewhere Desirable Acceptable Preferred Maximum Current Advice & Guidance Planning for Walking (CIHT 215) More research into walking is needed. Manual for Streets (27) Walkable Neighbourhoods a range of facilities within 1 minute (8m) walk. IHT Planning for Public Transport in Developments (IHT 1999) Walk to bus stop should be less than 4m reference to DoE Circular 82/73. Walk to Railway Station 8m. *NEW* Buses in Urban Developments (CIHT 218), see next page Transport Statistics GB % of all trips are walking, 78% of all trips less than 1 mile were on foot. 85% of people live within 59m of a bus stop, 7% of all journeys are by bus. Other Research Studies Daniels & Mulley Sydney Australia: 461m mean walk to a bus stop ; 85m mean walk to a rail station. Burke & Brown Brisbane Australia: 6m mean walk to a bus stop ; 14m mean walk to a rail station. Kuzmyak San Francisco USA: For distances up to 1,2m walking dominant mode of travel to rail stations. 1

2 21/2/218 Current Advice & Guidance *NEW* Buses in Urban Developments (CIHT 218) National Travel Survey Annual travel diary survey of 15, households across the UK, approx 8, households and 18, individuals participate each year. 22 to 212 dataset is available for public use. Data collected over 7 days; walks over 1 mile are recorded on all days; short walks are only recorded on the last day. Limitations of data distances are estimated and the diary is completed by respondents. Analysis of Data data used for just walking data used for walking to bus stops and railway stations. 99% of sample used to remove outliers., mean and 85 th percentile walking distances assessed for a range of variables. Walking distances rounded to nearest: 5m for just walking. 1m for walking to public transport. Just Walking Regional Variation 85 th Region Sample Size (m) (m) Percentile (m) North East North West Yorkshire & Humber East Midlands West Midlands East of England London South East South West Wales Scotland All Regions (Excl. London) All Regions (Incl. London) walking distance is constant, only 1m variation in the mean walking distance o/s London. O/s London the 85 th percentile walk is more variable. London has shortest mean and 85 th percentile walking distances unexpected, Providing for Journeys on Foot: Average walking distances are longest in Inner London. Further study is needed. 2

3 21/2/218 Urban/ Rural & Gender Analysis Journey Purpose Analysis Urban (22518) Rural (4642) 211 Census Rural/ Urban Classification (Sample Size) People living in urban areas walk further (1.95km) than those in Rural areas (1.6km). Walking distances in rural areas similar to walking distances in London Male (142) Female (1638) Gender (Sample Size) Gender split Women 54%, Men 46%; a 2% bias to women. Men walk further than women at the mean and 85 th percentile walking distances. 85 th Journey Purpose Sample Size % Split (m) Percentile (m) (m) Commuting % Business 29 1.% Education/ Escort % Shopping % Other Escort % Personal Business % Leisure % Other (including just walk) % All % Walking is mainly used for leisure & other purposes accounting for 4% of all walking journeys, and walking trips for education and shopping accounting for nearly 2% each. Longest walks are for Commuting and Other at median, mean and 85 th percentile walking distances. Difficult to compare data to suggested acceptable walking distances in Providing for Journeys on Foot. IHT (2) Town Centres Commuting/ school Sight-seeing Elsewhere Desirable Acceptable Preferred Maximum Walking to a Bus Stop Regional Variation North East (293) North West (775) Yorkshire & Humber (527) East Midlands (347) West Midlands (58) East of England (472) London (2916) Region (Sample Size) South East (717) Except London and All Regions, the sample sizes are small - treat these with caution. walk consistent at 48m, except London & Scotland. The 85 th percentile walk consistent at 81m, except in two regions. All Regions (Excl. London) 48m, 58m, 85 th percentile 81m. London - 4m, 49m, 85 th percentile 81m. South West (359) Wales (133) Scotland (871) All Regions - Excl. London (575) All Regions - Incl. London (799) 3

4 Cumulative Frequency % 21/2/218 Bus Stops - Cumulative Frequency 1% All Regions (Excl. London) Urban/ Rural & Gender Analysis % 85 th Percentile =.5 miles (81m) 8% = 7%.36 miles (58m) 6% =.3 miles (48m) 5% IHT= 4%.25 miles (4m) 3% 2% 1% % Distance (Miles) Urban (3719) Rural (485) 211 Census Rural/ Urban Classification (Sample Size) Rural - small sample size. No major difference in average walking distance between urban and rural areas, greater difference at 85 th percentile Male (269) Female (36) Gender (Sample Size) Gender split Women 59%, Men 41%; a 7% bias to women. No major difference in average walking distance between men and women, much greater difference at 85 th percentile. Age/ Disability Analysis England excluding London 9 8 Age/ Disability Journey Purpose Analysis Age (6+) (916) Results are broadly similar to the UK excluding London as a whole Walking difficulty sample size is small and unreliable Walking Difficulties, can go out on own (278) Commuting (1352) Business (97) Education/ Escort (845) Shopping (197) Other Escort (19) Personal Business (479) Leisure (188) All (575) Journey Purpose (Sample Size) Except commuting, leisure and shopping, the samples sizes are small and may not be reliable. walking distances are consistent at 48m, except shopping which is 45m. walking distance is just over 6m for commuting, education and leisure journey purposes, shopping has the lowest mean walking distance of 5m. The 85 th percentile walking distance is 81m for all purposes except leisure, which is 1,29m. 4

5 Cumulative Frequency % 21/2/218 Walking to a Railway Station Regional Variation North East North Yorkshire East West East of London South East South Wales (77) Scotland All Regions All Regions (2) West (293) & Humber Midlands Midlands England (3212) (878) West (89) (365) - Excl. - Incl. (191) (67) (191) (55) London London Region (Sample Size) (2676) (5888) Except London and All Regions, the sample sizes are small - treat these with caution. walk is consistent at 81m, except London which is 64m. The 85 th percentile walk is consistent at 1,61m, except London which is 1,29m. All Regions (Excl. London): 81m, 1,1m, 85 th percentile 1,61m. London: - 64m, 74m, 85 th percentile 1,29. IHT (1999) Maximum 8m. Rail Stations - Cumulative Frequency 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% =.5 miles (81m) IHT=.5 miles (8m) =.63 miles (1,1m) All Regions (Excl. London) 85 th Percentile = 1 mile (1,61m) Urban/ Rural & Gender Analysis % 2% 1% % Urban (24) Rural (37) 211 Census Rural/ Urban Classification (Sample Size) No difference in median and 85 th percentile walking distances between urban and rural areas and only marginal difference of 4m at the mean walking distance. Male (1594) Female (182) Gender (Weighted Sample Size) Gender split Women 41%, Men 59%; an 11% bias to men. Walking distances unaffected by gender. Distance (Miles) 5

6 21/2/218 Journey Purpose Analysis Commuting Business (165) Education/ Escort Shopping (22) Other Escort (5) Personal Business Leisure (598) All (2676) (137) (217) (119) Journey Purpose (Sample Size) 5% of walks to rail station is for commuting and 25% are leisure. Walking distances unaffected by journey purpose. Discussion & Conclusion Just Walking distances in London for Just Walk are shorter than elsewhere in UK. Just Walk is mainly a leisure activity, but also important for education and shopping. When assessing accessibility or walking catchments the 85 th percentile walk should be used - 195m; 16m in London. Walking to Bus Stops & Railway Stations Average distance walked to bus stops o/s London is further than 4m in IHT 1999; similar in London. Average distance walked to rail station o/s London is further than 8m in IHT 1999; less in London. What distance to use? The contribution that the access distance has to the perceived convenience of public transport is not clear. Furthest catchment is the 85 th percentile distance, but is unlikely to be attractive to potential passengers. The median and mean could be used, but the distribution doesn t give a clear answer - further study. Suggested Walking Distances (m) (m) 85 th Percentile (m) Walk as a Single Stage UK (Excl, London) 8 1,15 1,95 London 8 1, 1,6 Walk to a Bus Stop UK (Excl, London) London Walk to a Railway Station UK (Excl, London) 81 1,1 1,61 London ,29 Introduction Cycling is an important mode of travel. How far people cycle is factor in: Accessibility/ Sustainability Studies. Allocating land in Local Plans. Determining planning applications. Previous advice has been withdrawn. Other advice/ guidance is limited. Using the National Travel Survey and London Travel Demand Survey we provide an initial assessment how far people cycle as a single stage trip. 6

7 21/2/218 Review of Advice & Guidance Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 Transport (2 & 21) Cycling also has potential to substitute for short car trips, particularly those under five kilometres, and to form part of a longer journey by public transport. Has been used for many years as the maximum reasonable cycle distance. Deleted in 212 but the cycling distance remains in common use. National Planning Policy Framework (212) No advice. Planning Practice Guidance for Transport Assessment and Statements (DCLG, 214) Recognises a qualitative and quantitative description of cycle movements in the vicinity of proposed developments is needed. No guidance on acceptable cycle distances. Planning for Cycling (CIHT, 214) The majority of cycling trips are for short distances, with 8% being less than five miles [8,m] and with 4% being less than two miles [3,2m]. However, the majority of trips by all modes are also short distances (67% are less than five miles, and 38% are less than two miles); therefore, the bicycle is a potential mode for many of these trips. No advice on cycle catchment distances for new developments or land allocations in Local Plans Current Advice & Guidance Manual for Streets (27) No guidance on acceptable cycle distances. Transport Statistics GB (215) 2% of all trips are cycling. Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon (DfT, 211) Cycling is at its highest where trips are between 1,6m to 3,2m (3%) and 3,2 to 8,m (2%). Understanding Walking and Cycling (Pooley et al, 211) For their research 2,5m was adopted for cycling (roughly the average acceptable distance travelled over 1 minutes to access everyday activities). Cycling in Urban Areas (ECF, 1998) Many utility cycle journeys are under a 4,8m cycle ride, whilst for commuter journeys a trip distance of over 8,m is not uncommon. Survey Data National Travel Survey (NTS) Annual travel diary survey of 15, households across the UK, approx 8, households and 18, individuals participate each year. 22 to 214 dataset is available for public use. Limitations of data distances are estimated and the diary is completed by respondents. Special User License enables analysis of Inner & Outer London unable to explore data for this research due to financial constraints. London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS) LTDS is a continuous survey of the London area. Household survey of around 8, per annum, from some 5% fully cooperated. Transport for London (TfL) provided data for both Inner and Outer London. Limitations of data respondents report their origin and destination of each trip and TfL calculate the distance as a straight-line measurement. Distances should be treat with caution. Analysis of Data data from NTS and from LTDS used for cycle purposes. 99% of sample used to remove top 1% of unusually long cycle rides. Cycling distances rounded to nearest 5m. and 85 th percentile cycling distances assessed for a range of variables, which include: Regional variations. Journey purpose. Rural/ Urban classifications. Gender. Age. From the data an appropriate cycle distance for planning and decision making purposes has been determined for the UK (excluding London) and Inner/ Outer London. 7

8 21/2/218 NTS & LTDS Results Regional Variation Region Sample Size (m) NTS Data Variations in the average distances travelled. Excl. Wales, Scotland and London variation would only be 15m. Greater variation in the 85 th percentile distances. 85 th Percentile (m) North East North West Yorkshire & Humber East Midlands West Midlands East of England London South East South West Wales Scotland All Regions (Excl. London) All Regions (Incl. London) LTDS Data Inner London Outer London London (Inner & Outer) Different methods of data catchment estimated distance travelled and calculated straight-line distance. LTDS v NTS London 85 th Percentile Cycle Distance Journey Purpose Analysis (Proportion) 45% 4% 35% 3% 25% 31% 35% 26% 37% 29% 39% 2% 15% 1% 5% % 14% 12% 1% 11% 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 2% 2% 1% 1% UK () Inner London Outer London Commuting and leisure are the main journey purpose trips, minimum of 64% cumulatively. Shopping and education accounts for around 2% for each region. Illustrative site located in Brentford, Hounslow, Outer London Cycling for business is very low for the rest of the UK (1.8%) and between 7% and 1% for Outer and Inner London. Other escort has the least proportion of trips, less than 2% for each region. 8

9 Distance 21/2/218 Journey Purpose Analysis (85 th Percentile Distance) 12 Urban/ Rural & Gender Analysis (NTS Data) People cycle furthest for commuting purposes, Outer London cycle further than the rest of the UK. The UK (Excl. London) cycle the furthest for leisure purposes, Inner and Outer London cycle considerably shorter distances. People cycle shortest distances for shopping and education/ escort trips Commuting Leisure Shopping Education/ Escort Business Journey Purpose Personal Business Other Escort All Purposes UK (Excl London) Inner London Outer London Cycling Distances by 211 Census Classification (Excl. London) Urban (129) Rural (2382) 211 Census Rural/ Urban Classification People living in rural areas cycle further than those in urban areas at the mean and 85 th percentile distances. Cycling distances in rural areas similar to those in London from the NTS data How Far Do People Cycle - Gender (Excl. London) Male (9692) Female (3775) All Gender (13467) Gender) Gender split Women 28%, Men 72% Men cycle further than women at the mean and 85 th percentile distances. Age Group Analysis (LTDS Data) Cycle - Age, Inner v Outer London (85th Percentile) Age Only 1% of cyclists under age of 21, 71% of cyclists are aged between 21 and 49. People under the age of 2 cycle the shortest distances. People aged between 21 and 59 cycle the furthest Upto the age of 39, generally people in Outer London cycle further, over the age of 39 people generally cycle furthest in Inner London to 1 11 to to 2 21 to 29 3 to 39 4 to 49 5 to All Ages Outer London Inner London Discussion & Conclusion PPG13 s recommended 5km cycle catchment is now superseded and there is little information about how far people cycle to underpin current policy and guidance. The 85 th percentile distances for all purposes for the UK (Excl London) is 7,25m, Inner London is 6,65m and Outer London 5,2m, although London distances are straight-line. Policy making and decision taking should be based on the best and most recent evidence. Cycling is mainly used for commuting and leisure purposes, accounting for over 64%. Data suggest that a greater proportion of men cycle, and also further than women. Cycling distances and participation increases significantly after the age of 21. The cycle distance is a dependant variable and can be changed because of another variable or depends on another variable, further study on this would be useful. Further research using the Special Licence Dataset from NTS would be useful which includes Inner and Outer London, a comparison with the LTDS dataset could be explored. Further analysis on the role of gender and age on journey purpose cycle proportions would be useful, adding further analytical detail to the data and help with more specific decision-making. 9

10 21/2/218 Suggested Cycling Distances (m) 85 th Percentile (m) All Journey Purposes UK () Inner London Outer London Commuting UK () Inner London Outer London 45 9 Leisure UK () Inner London Outer London Shopping UK () Inner London Outer London Education/ Escort UK () 23 4 Inner London Outer London Business UK () Inner London Outer London Personal Business UK () Inner London Outer London Other Escort UK () Inner London Outer London