Designing the Future Shared Space: Qualitative Research Report for Department for Transport October 2010 Document Control Project Title: Shared Space: Qualitative Research MVA Project Number: C37831 Document Type: Report Directory & File Name: I:\Tep\Projects\London & Southern\C37831 - Shared Space\Case Studies\Operational Research\Stage 2 Qual\Disability Research\Reporting\Shared Space_Qualitative Research.Doc Document Approval Primary Author: Liz Dickens Other Author(s): Emma Healy Catherine Plews Kayleigh Uthayakumar Reviewer(s): Stuart Reid Formatted by: Liz Dickens Distribution Issue Date Distribution Comments 1 04/10/2010 Internal Draft for review 2 27/06/2011 Internal Final draft for review 3 External Final draft for review This report, and information or advice which it contains, is provided by MVA Consultancy Ltd solely for internal use and reliance by its Client in performance of MVA Consultancy Ltd’s duties and liabilities under its contract with the Client. Any advice, opinions, or recommendations within this report should be read and relied upon only in the context of the report as a whole. The advice and opinions in this report are based upon the information made available to MVA Consultancy Ltd at the date of this report and on current UK standards, codes, technology and construction practices as at the date of this report. Following final delivery of this report to the Client, MVA Consultancy Ltd will have no further obligations or duty to advise the Client on any matters, including development affecting the information or advice provided in this report. This report has been prepared by MVA Consultancy Ltd in their professional capacity as Consultants. The contents of the report do not, in any way, purport to include any manner of legal advice or opinion. This report is prepared in accordance with the terms and conditions of MVA Consultancy Ltd’s contract with the Client. Regard should be had to those terms and conditions when considering and/or placing any reliance on this report. Should the Client wish to release this report to a Third Party for that party's reliance, MVA Consultancy Ltd may, at its discretion, agree to such release provided that: (a) MVA Consultancy Ltd's written agreement is obtained prior to such release, and (b) by release of the report to the Third Party, that Third Party does not acquire any rights, contractual or otherwise, whatsoever against MVA Consultancy Ltd and MVA Consultancy Ltd, accordingly, assume no duties, liabilities or obligations to that Third Party, and (c) MVA Consultancy Ltd accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage incurred by the Client or for any conflict of MVA Consultancy Ltd's interests arising out of the Client's release of this report to the Third Party. Contents 1 Introduction 1.1 1.1 Introduction 1.1 2 Methodology 2.1 2.1 Overview of Methodology 2.1 2.2 Site selection 2.2 2.3 Recruitment 2.6 2.4 Accompanied Journeys and Interviews 2.10 2.5 Structured Questionnaire 2.11 2.6 Data Analysis 2.11 3 Findings: Drivers and Pedestrians 3.1 3.1 Introduction 3.1 3.2 Journey Routes 3.1 3.3 Drivers 3.3 3.4 Pedestrians 3.11 3.5 Similarities and differences across user types 3.26 4 Findings: Disabled Users Overall 4.1 4.1 Introduction 4.1 4.2 Profile of Participants 4.1 4.3 Journey Routes 4.2 5 Findings: Disabled People in Shared Space 5.1 5.1 Introduction 5.1 5.2 Visually Impaired People 5.1 5.3 Mobility Impaired People 5.14 5.4 People with Learning Difficulties 5.21 5.5 People with Hearing Loss 5.28 5.6 Similarities and differences across user types 5.35 6 Findings: Legibility in Shared Space 6.1 6.1 Introduction 6.1 6.2 Visually Impaired People 6.1 6.3 Mobility Impaired People 6.28 6.4 People with Learning Difficulties 6.45 6.5 People with Hearing Loss 6.59 6.6 Similarities and differences across user types 6.71 7 Conclusions 7.1 7.1 Introduction 7.1 Shared Space: Qualitative Research 1 Contents 7.2 Points to note 7.1 7.3 Conclusions 7.1 Tables Table 2.1 Sites Selected for Research with Drivers and Pedestrians 2.3 Table 2.2 Sites Selected for Research with Disabled People 2.5 Table 2.3 Quotas and Achieved Numbers of Drivers and Pedestrians 2.7 Table 2.4 Quotas and Achieved Numbers of Disabled People 2.9 Table 3.1 Control streets and shared space areas, by site 3.2 Table 4.1 Control streets and shared space areas, by site 4.3 Table 5.1 Participants’ Ideal Streets 5.40 Table 6.1 Most important navigation aids, ranked 6.22 Table 6.2 How navigation aids are located 6.23 Table 6.3 How navigation aids are used 6.24 Table 6.4 Most important navigation aids, ranked 6.41 Table 6.5 Most important navigation aids, ranked 6.57 Table 6.6 Most important navigation aids, ranked 6.70 Appendices Appendix A – Recruitment Questionnaires Appendix B – Discussion Guides Appendix C – Structured Questionnaire Shared Space: Qualitative Research 2 Executive Summary Introduction Qualitative research was undertaken in areas with shared space designs as part of a larger study which aims to provide evidence to support design guidance on the development of shared space schemes. To ensure that the design guidance is comprehensive and robust, it needs to be evidence led and supported by knowledge from existing schemes. The qualitative research consisted of accompanied journeys and interviews with a number of different user types: drivers; non-disabled pedestrians; visually impaired pedestrians; mobility impaired pedestrians; pedestrians with learning difficulties; and pedestrians who are deaf or hard of hearing. The key aims of this research were to better understand: How drivers and pedestrians behave in streets; How disabled people orientate and navigate in shared space; How disabled people have to vs. want to use streets; The value of different design features; The extent to which people enjoy and feel comfortable in shared space; and The trade offs people are willing to make, for example between comfort and visual amenity. In meeting these aims, this research provides independent evidence and an improved understanding of how different user types behave in shared space, and how this differs from behaviour in conventionally designed streets, which will support more precise design guidance. It should be noted that this is a qualitative research report and as such it aims to present all the different themes that arise from the research rather than to make statistically significant statements about any particular user type. This report is not meant to be representative of all drivers, pedestrians and disabled people, but instead to detail the situations and emotions experienced by our research participants and discuss how this could be similar or different to other users’ experiences. Methodology Accompanied journeys and interviews were undertaken with a total of 104 research participants. This qualitative research took place in two stages: Between Monday 7th December 2009 and Wednesday 3rd February 2010 research with drivers and non-disabled pedestrians took place; and between Tuesday 6th July and Thursday 5th August 2010 research with disabled pedestrians took place. Research with disabled users was further split into two sub-components: Disabled People in Shared Space; and, Legibility in Shared Space. Site Selection Before the research could be undertaken sites had to be chosen and participants recruited. Selected sites were chosen, where possible, as offering controlled comparisons of level surfaces with non-level surface environments, a range of high versus low traffic flows, and a range of design features including corduroy and other tactile paving, tonal contrast, bollards and chicanes, etc. Four sites were selected for the driver and pedestrian research: Shared Space: Qualitative Research i Summary Elwick Square, Ashford; Milsom Street, Bath; Chertsey Road, Woking; and, Seven Dials, London. Seven sites were selected for the research with disabled users: Walworth Road, London; St John’s Road, Clapham; New Road, Brighton; Market Avenue, Plymouth; Market Place, Newbury; Cookridge Street, Leeds; and High Street, Slough. Recruitment Quotas were set and recruitment questionnaires designed to ensure different types of user were represented within the research. Recruitment for the driver and pedestrian research took place on-street within specified areas made up of the shared space scheme and surrounding area. Quotas were set to ensure participants with a range of journey purposes, ages and gender took part. Sixty participants took part in this stage of the research, 30 drivers and 30 pedestrians. Due to the hard to reach nature of disabled people, a variety of recruitment approaches were used for these components. Recruitment methods included a mixture of targeted 'free find', networking methods and snowballing (eg through day centres, schools for blind people, centres for disabled people, sheltered accommodation etc) and on-street interception. We expected a good proportion of independently mobile people recruited to be willing and able to meet the interviewer by appointment at a designated meeting place. However, for any who did not feel comfortable making their own way, including any who would normally avoid the site, they were encouraged to participate through our offering options of: Interviewer meets participant at/near to home, if close by; Agreeing to participants bringing someone else with them if it makes them feel more at ease (but any accompaniers would not be allowed to participate in the accompanied journey and interview); or Taxi pick-up and drop-off from home. In addition, all participants were told they would be given a cash ‘thank you’ in recognition of their time and trouble and deaf participants were offered the use of a BSL translator.