DOCSLIB.ORG

Travel in London Report 12 Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Travel in London Report 12 Report Travel in London Travel Report 12 Travel in London Report 12 ©Transport for London 2019 All rights reserved. Reproduction permitted for research, private study and internal circulation within an organisation. Extracts may be reproduced provided the source is acknowledged. Disclaimer This publication is intended to provide accurate information. However, Transport for London (TfL) and the authors accept no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions or for any damage or loss arising from use of the information provided. Overview ...................................................................................................... 7 1. Introduction ..................................................................................... 27 1.1 TfL’s Travel in London reports ....................................................................... 27 1.2 Travel in London report 12 ................................................................................ 27 1.3 About Transport for London (TfL) ................................................................. 28 1.4 Further information ............................................................................................ 28 Section 1: Overall travel demand and mode shares ..........................29 2. Overall trends in travel demand and mode shares ................. 31 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 31 2.2 Historic and changing trends in total travel in London .......................... 31 2.3 Total travel in London ....................................................................................... 32 2.4 Trips in London ..................................................................................................... 32 2.5 Journey stages in London ................................................................................ 34 2.6 Mode shares in London ..................................................................................... 36 2.7 Active, efficient, sustainable mode shares ................................................ 39 3. London’s population and economy ........................................... 43 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 43 3.2 London’s population .......................................................................................... 43 3.3 London’s economy .............................................................................................. 51 3.4 Further consideration of the factors underlying travel demand trends ....................................................................................................................... 57 4. Travel by London residents ......................................................... 59 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 59 4.2 Travel by London residents: trip rates......................................................... 59 4.3 Travel by London residents: active, efficient and sustainable mode shares .......................................................................................................... 65 4.4 Focus on: car ownership in London .............................................................. 69 4.5 Travel in London at night ................................................................................... 81 Section 2: Healthy Streets and healthy people ................................. 85 5. Active travel and active people ................................................... 87 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 87 5.2 Active travel: overall trends ............................................................................ 87 5.3 Physical activity and active travel .................................................................. 88 5.4 New survey of pedestrian activity in central London ............................ 90 5.5 Active people near-market segmentation ................................................. 94 5.6 Active people qualitative research ................................................................ 96 6. Active travel: cycling in London ................................................. 101 1 Travel in London, report 12 6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 101 6.2 Cycling volumes in central, inner, and outer London ............................ 101 6.3 Temporal variations in cycling demand .....................................................103 6.4 Cycling volumes across strategic cordons and screenlines .............. 106 6.5 Cycling volumes on recently opened infrastructure ........................... 106 6.6 Santander Cycles ............................................................................................... 108 6.7 Cycling demographics and attitudes: a summary ................................. 109 6.8 Cycling demographics among London residents ..................................... 110 6.9 Cycling demographics and behaviours on recently opened routes ....................................................................................................................... 113 6.10 Active travel behaviour among residents in the Mini-Holland boroughs ................................................................................................................. 115 6.11 London’s developing cycle network ............................................................. 118 7. Healthy Streets .............................................................................. 119 7.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 119 7.2 The Healthy Streets Indicators ....................................................................... 119 7.3 Healthy Streets Mystery Shopper Survey .................................................. 120 7.4 Healthy Streets Check for Designers .......................................................... 128 7.5 The contributions of green infrastructure to the Healthy Streets Approach ............................................................................................................... 129 8. Road danger reduction ................................................................ 133 8.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 133 8.2 Road danger reduction: key trends .............................................................. 133 8.3 Recent trends in casualties ............................................................................ 134 8.4 Longer-term trends in casualties ................................................................ 134 8.5 Casualties by road user during 2018 ............................................................. 136 8.6 Trends in casualties by road user ................................................................. 137 8.7 Casualties resulting from collisions involving a bus or a coach ....... 138 8.8 Differences by casualty gender and age .................................................... 138 8.9 Child casualties ................................................................................................... 139 8.10 Casualties by location: inner and outer London .................................... 140 8.11 Vehicles involved in collisions ....................................................................... 141 8.12 Wider contextualisation of road casualty trends in London .............. 141 8.13 Progress towards Vision Zero targets ........................................................ 146 9. Travel demand trends: motorised road travel ....................... 149 9.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 149 9.2 Overall trends for motorised road traffic in London .......................... 149 9.3 Motorised traffic: car (including PHVs) ....................................................... 153 9.4 Motorised traffic: freight ................................................................................ 154 9.5 Understanding the drivers of freight demand in London .................... 158 9.6 Goods vehicles entering the central London Congestion Charge zone ........................................................................................................................ 164 9.7 Motorised traffic: licensed taxis and private hire vehicles ................. 164 2 Travel in London, report 12 9.8 Motorised traffic: understanding the nature of the market for private hire vehicles in London ..................................................................... 167 10. Cleaner air and climate change ................................................. 173 10.1 The Ultra Low Emission Zone in central London ................................... 173 10.2 Climate change .................................................................................................... 185 Section 3: A good public transport experience ................................ 189 11. Public transport: travel demand trends ................................... 191 11.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 191 11.2 Public
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The London Congestion Charge
    Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 20, Number 4—Fall 2006—Pages 157–176 The London Congestion Charge Jonathan Leape y the 1990s, the average speed of trips across London was below that at the beginning of the twentieth century—before the car was introduced (New- B bery, 1990, p. 35). Traffic speeds in central London had fallen more than 20 percent since the 1960s, from an average 12.7 mph for the morning peak period in 1968 (and a high of 14.2 mph in 1975) to 10 mph in 1998. Even in the larger area of inner London, drivers in 1998 spent almost 30 percent of their time stationary during peak periods and more than half their time traveling at speeds of less than 10 mph (Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, 1998). By 2002, the all-day average travel speed in central London was just 8.6 mph (14.3 km/hour), compared to an uncongested (night-time or “free flow”) average speed of around 20 mph (32 km/hour). Congestion, measured in terms of minutes of delay per mile compared to uncongested conditions, averaged 3.7 minutes/mile (2.3 min/km) (Transport for London, 2003a, p. 11). With more than one million people entering central London between 7:00 and 10:00 a.m. on an average workday, and more than one-quarter of those by road, the cost of congestion was clearly considerable. Public concern over levels of traffic congestion was high. An independent survey in 1999 identified public transport and congestion as the two most “impor- tant problems requiring action”—selected by 46 and 33 percent of London resi- dents, respectively, compared to 20 percent for crime or law and order.
    [Show full text]
  • The Operator's Story Appendix
    Railway and Transport Strategy Centre The Operator’s Story Appendix: London’s Story © World Bank / Imperial College London Property of the World Bank and the RTSC at Imperial College London Community of Metros CoMET The Operator’s Story: Notes from London Case Study Interviews February 2017 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide a permanent record for the researchers of what was said by people interviewed for ‘The Operator’s Story’ in London. These notes are based upon 14 meetings between 6th-9th October 2015, plus one further meeting in January 2016. This document will ultimately form an appendix to the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’ piece Although the findings have been arranged and structured by Imperial College London, they remain a collation of thoughts and statements from interviewees, and continue to be the opinions of those interviewed, rather than of Imperial College London. Prefacing the notes is a summary of Imperial College’s key findings based on comments made, which will be drawn out further in the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’. Method This content is a collation in note form of views expressed in the interviews that were conducted for this study. Comments are not attributed to specific individuals, as agreed with the interviewees and TfL. However, in some cases it is noted that a comment was made by an individual external not employed by TfL (‘external commentator’), where it is appropriate to draw a distinction between views expressed by TfL themselves and those expressed about their organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation Into Reliability of the Jubilee Line
    Investigation into Reliability: London Underground Jubilee Line An Interactive Qualifying Project submitted to the Faculty of WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science By Jack Arnis Agolli Marianna Bailey Errando Berwin Jayapurna Yiannis Kaparos Date: 26 April 2017 Report Submitted to: Malcolm Dobell CPC Project Services Professors Rosenstock and Hall-Phillips Worcester Polytechnic Institute This report represents work of WPI undergraduate students submitted to the faculty as evidence of a degree requirement. WPI routinely publishes these reports on its web site without editorial or peer review. For more information about the projects program at WPI, see http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Projects. Abstract Metro systems are often faced with reliability issues; specifically pertaining to safety, accessibility, train punctuality, and stopping accuracy. The project goal was to assess the reliability of the London Underground’s Jubilee Line and the systems implemented during the Jubilee Line extension. The team achieved this by interviewing train drivers and Transport for London employees, surveying passengers, validating the stopping accuracy of the trains, measuring dwell times, observing accessibility and passenger behavior on platforms with Platform Edge Doors, and overall train performance patterns. ii Acknowledgements We would currently like to thank everyone who helped us complete this project. Specifically we would like to thank our sponsor Malcolm Dobell for his encouragement, expert advice, and enthusiasm throughout the course of the project. We would also like to thank our contacts at CPC Project Services, Gareth Davies and Mehmet Narin, for their constant support, advice, and resources provided during the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--History History 2016 Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945 Danielle K. Dodson University of Kentucky, [email protected] Digital Object Identifier: http://dx.doi.org/10.13023/ETD.2016.339 Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Dodson, Danielle K., "Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945" (2016). Theses and Dissertations--History. 40. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/history_etds/40 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the History at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--History by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each third-party copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Accidents and the London Congestion Charge
    Economics Working Paper Series 2014/015 Traffic Accidents and the London Congestion Charge Colin P. Green, John. S. Heywood and Maria Navarro The Department of Economics Lancaster University Management School Lancaster LA1 4YX UK © Authors All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission, provided that full acknowledgement is given. LUMS home page: http://www.lums.lancs.ac.uk/ Traffic Accidents and the London Congestion Charge Colin P. Green1, John. S. Heywood2,1 and Maria Navarro1 1Lancaster University 2 University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Abstract In a rare effort to internalize congestion costs, London recently instituted charges for traveling by car to the central city during peak hours. Although the theoretical influence on the number and severity of traffic accidents is ambiguous, we show that the policy generated a substantial reduction in both accidents and fatalities in the charged area and hours. At the same time, the spatial, temporal and vehicle specific nature of the charge may cause unintended substitutions as traffic and accidents shift to other proximate areas, times and to uncharged vehicles. We demonstrate that, to the contrary, the congestion charge reduced accidents and fatalities in adjacent areas, times and for uncharged vehicles. These results are consistent with the government's objective to use the congestion charge to more broadly promote public transport and change driving habits. JEL Codes: I18, R48, H27 Keywords: Traffic Congestion; Pricing; Vehicle Accidents The authors thank the Melvin Lurie Memorial Fund at UWM which allowed Heywood and Navarro to work together in the fall of 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Operators Route Contracts
    Company Name Routes On Contract Contract Start Date Contract End Date Extended Expiry Date Blue Triangle Buses Limited 300 06-Mar-10 07-Dec-18 03-Mar-17 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 193 01-Oct-11 28-Sep-18 28-Sep-18 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 364 01-Nov-14 01-Nov-19 29-Oct-21 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 147 07-May-16 07-May-21 05-May-23 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 376 17-Sep-16 17-Sep-21 15-Sep-23 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 346 01-Oct-16 01-Oct-21 29-Sep-23 Blue Triangle Buses Limited EL3 18-Feb-17 18-Feb-22 16-Feb-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited EL1/NEL1 18-Feb-17 18-Feb-22 16-Feb-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited EL2 18-Feb-17 18-Feb-22 16-Feb-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 101 04-Mar-17 04-Mar-22 01-Mar-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 5 26-Aug-17 26-Aug-22 23-Aug-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 15/N15 26-Aug-17 26-Aug-22 23-Aug-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 115 26-Aug-17 26-Aug-22 23-Aug-24 Blue Triangle Buses Limited 674 17-Oct-15 16-Oct-20 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 649/650/651 02-Jan-16 01-Jan-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 687 30-Apr-16 30-Apr-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 608 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 646 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 648 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 652 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 656 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 679 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote Blue Triangle Buses Limited 686 03-Sep-16 03-Sep-21 See footnote
    [Show full text]
  • Tube and Bus Fares September 2006
    Budget Committee Tube and bus fares September 2006 Budget Committee Tube and bus fares September 2006 copyright Greater London Authority September 2006 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN 10: 1 85261 923 6 ISBN 13: 978 1 85261 923 7 Cover photograph © Adam Hinton This publication is printed on recycled paper The Budget Committee Sally Hamwee - Chairman (Liberal Democrat) Andrew Pelling - Deputy Chair (Conservative) John Biggs - Labour Bob Blackman - Conservative Peter Hulme Cross - One London Jenny Jones - Green Joanne McCartney - Labour Bob Neill - Conservative Mike Tuffrey - Liberal Democrat The Budget Committee’s general terms of reference are to examine at each stage of the consultation process the Mayor’s budget proposals for the next financial year and to report to the London Assembly thereon as necessary. It can also examine, monitor and report to the London Assembly from time to time on matters relating to the budgets and performance of the Greater London Authority (GLA) and the Functional Bodies (Transport for London (TfL), Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) and the London Development Agency (LDA)). Contacts: Scrutiny Manager London Assembly Media Office E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: 020 7983 4507 Telephone: 020 7983 4228 Contents Page Chair’s foreword 1 Executive summary 2 Chapters 1 Introduction 3 2
    [Show full text]
  • Niche Innovation Dynamics and the Urban Mobility Transition the Case of Dockless Bike-Sharing in London
    Niche innovation dynamics and the urban mobility transition The case of dockless bike-sharing in London Russell Cannon Urban Studies Master’s Programme (Two-Year) 30 Credits VT2019 Supervisor: Désirée Nilsson 1 Abstract This thesis seeks to provide a detailed understanding of the introduction of dockless bike-sharing to London. As part of a wave of new smart and shared mobility services that are aiming to transform the way people move around cities, this emerging form of transport has created disruptions in London since its launch in 2017. This study aims analyse to what extent dockless bike-sharing aligns or conflicts with the aims and objectives of local authorities governing public space in London. In doing so, it also aims to reveal insights into transformations in contemporary mobility by exploring the dynamics of niche innovations within socio-technical transitions, thus contributing to knowledge in the field of transition studies. To do this, a qualitative case study methodology was employed using document analysis and interviews with four stakeholders integrally involved in the case study, representing both public authorities and a private sector dockless bike-sharing operator, Mobike. The findings demonstrate that dockless bike-sharing is well aligned with the city’s explicit objectives to reduce car dependency and encourage active travel. It has particular potential to make cycling more accessible by bringing bike-sharing to parts of the city that do not have access to the pre-existing, docked bike-sharing scheme, operated by the central transport authority, Transport for London. Despite this, dockless bike-sharing, as a niche innovation, has struggled to break into the existing urban mobility regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture for All Londoners Mayor of London’S Culture Strategy
    Culture for all Londoners Mayor of London’s Culture Strategy December 2018 CULTURE FOR ALL LONDONERS Copyright Greater London Authority December 2018 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 See Photography Credits for copyright and caption information. All images are © Greater London Authority unless otherwise stated. 3 Contents Mayor’s Foreword 4 Executive Summary 10 Chapter 1: The Mayor’s Vision and Priorities for Culture 24 Chapter 2: Context and Scope of the Strategy 28 Chapter 3: Love London 46 Chapter 4: Culture and Good Growth 70 Chapter 5: Creative Londoners 104 Chapter 6: World City 126 Chapter 7: Achieving the Mayor’s Vision 148 Policy Actions 160 Glossary 170 Photography Credits 178 CULTURE FOR ALL LONDONERS 5 Mayor’s foreword Culture is our city’s DNA. It’s the thing Crucially, culture can also be used as that binds us all together - both in times a tool to steer young Londoners away of crisis and in times of celebration. from trouble and towards education and Culture is what makes the daytime thrive employment. It can open up new and and the night time come alive. positive paths forward for our young people, offering an alternative to getting London is one of the most culturally sucked into a life of crime, gangs and rich cities on the planet – with world- violence. class institutions and globally renowned talent. Our city’s creative economy My ambition is for a city where all now employs one in six Londoners and Londoners can make the most of their contributes £47bn to the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding and Managing Congestion
    Understanding and Managing Congestion For Transport for London On behalf of Greater London Authority Final Version 1-0 November 2017 Understanding and Managing Congestion Final Version 1-0 November 2017 Produced by: For: Transport for London On behalf of: Greater London Authority Contact: Jim Bradley Integrated Transport Planning Ltd. 6 Hay’s Lane London Bridge London SE1 2HB UNITED KINGDOM 0203 300 1810 [email protected] www.itpworld.net Understanding and Managing Congestion Project Information Sheet Client TfL Project Code 2398 Project Name Understanding and Managing Congestion Project Director Jim Bradley Project Manager Robin Kaenzig Quality Manager Jim Bradley Additional Team Members Jon Harris, Juan Sanclemente, Matt Cottam, Ruby Stringer, Georgia Corr, David Hicks File Location F:\2300-2399\2398 TfL Understanding and Managing Congestion\Technical\Final Report Document Control Sheet Ver. File Name Description Prep. Rev. App. Date V1-0 F:\ Understanding and Final Report RK JB JB 14/11/2017 Managing Congestion Final Report 141117 v1-0 Notice This report has been prepared for TfL and GLA in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment. Integrated Transport Planning Ltd cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party. Understanding and Managing Congestion Acknowledgements An independent panel of experts was invited to provide advice and expertise to inform this study. The panel met four times over the course of the study’s development and comprised: • Dr Rachel Aldred; • Mr Terence Bendixson; • Dr Adrian Davis; and • Dr Lynn Sloman. We would like to extend our sincere thanks to all the panel members for their time and expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Transport with So Many Ways to Get to and Around London, Doing Business Here Has Never Been Easier
    Transport With so many ways to get to and around London, doing business here has never been easier First Capital Connect runs up to four trains an hour to Blackfriars/London Bridge. Fares from £8.90 single; journey time 35 mins. firstcapitalconnect.co.uk To London by coach There is an hourly coach service to Victoria Coach Station run by National Express Airport. Fares from £7.30 single; journey time 1 hour 20 mins. nationalexpress.com London Heathrow Airport T: +44 (0)844 335 1801 baa.com To London by Tube The Piccadilly line connects all five terminals with central London. Fares from £4 single (from £2.20 with an Oyster card); journey time about an hour. tfl.gov.uk/tube To London by rail The Heathrow Express runs four non- Greater London & airport locations stop trains an hour to and from London Paddington station. Fares from £16.50 single; journey time 15-20 mins. Transport for London (TfL) Travelcards are not valid This section details the various types Getting here on this service. of transport available in London, providing heathrowexpress.com information on how to get to the city On arrival from the airports, and how to get around Heathrow Connect runs between once in town. There are also listings for London City Airport Heathrow and Paddington via five stations transport companies, whether travelling T: +44 (0)20 7646 0088 in west London. Fares from £7.40 single. by road, rail, river, or even by bike or on londoncityairport.com Trains run every 30 mins; journey time foot. See the Transport & Sightseeing around 25 mins.
    [Show full text]
  • The Go-Ahead Group Plc Annual Report and Accounts 2019 1 Stable Cash Generative
    Annual Report and Accounts for the year ended 29 June 2019 Taking care of every journey Taking care of every journey Regional bus Regional bus market share (%) We run fully owned commercial bus businesses through our eight bus operations in the UK. Our 8,550 people and 3,055 buses provide Stagecoach: 26% excellent services for our customers in towns and cities on the south FirstGroup: 21% coast of England, in north east England, East Yorkshire and East Anglia Arriva: 14% as well as in vibrant cities like Brighton, Oxford and Manchester. Go-Ahead’s bus customers are the most satisfied in the UK; recently Go-Ahead: 11% achieving our highest customer satisfaction score of 92%. One of our National Express: 7% key strengths in this market is our devolved operating model through Others: 21% which our experienced management teams deliver customer focused strategies in their local areas. We are proud of the role we play in improving the health and wellbeing of our communities through reducing carbon 2621+14+11+7+21L emissions with cleaner buses and taking cars off the road. London & International bus London bus market share (%) In London, we operate tendered bus contracts for Transport for London (TfL), running around 157 routes out of 16 depots. TfL specify the routes Go-Ahead: 23% and service frequency with the Mayor of London setting fares. Contracts Metroline: 18% are tendered for five years with a possible two year extension, based on Arriva: 18% performance against punctuality targets. In addition to earning revenue Stagecoach: 13% for the mileage we operate, we have the opportunity to earn Quality Incentive Contract bonuses if we meet these targets.
    [Show full text]