View Single Post
  #12   Report Post  
Old October 11th 06, 06:15 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Dave Arquati Dave Arquati is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 191
Default "44% of pedestrians use the Tube map to navigate around London"

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Mizter T wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Tue, 9 Oct 2006, Mizter T wrote:

BBC News "Bid to make London walk-friendly"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6032969.stm

"More than 44% of pedestrians use the Tube map to navigate around
London, according to a study by TfL [...]

Not surprising really, but I'm sure the ng could easily list a hundred
stupities should one navigate by this method, even if we ignore the old
chestnut that is Leicester Square to Covent Garden!

Perhaps what we need is a sort of Beck-style diagram for walking routes
(ie roads). It couldn't cover every road, and probably couldn't cover
the
whole of London on one map (ie you might just do central London), but if
it could give people a simple skeleton on which to hang their
geographical
knowledge of London, it might make them more confident in walking about.
Show major roads in the area, and have some notation for sidestreets.
And
an index!

Alternatively, spider-style maps dotted round the place.


Maybe. I think the required map already exists - the A-Z


No. The problem with that, or anything similar, is that it shows too
much - it's hard to pick up the A-Z and instantly see what a sensible
walking route between two nontrivially distant points is. I think people
need something that focuses on key walking arteries.


I agree - the A-Z also highlights classified main roads, which are aimed
solely at motor traffic; key walking arteries can be any class of road,
but I think their most important property is intuitive wayfinding - i.e.
avoiding lots of changes of direction along different streets, which can
confuse pedestrians and slow them down. Other properties might be good
facilities (i.e. at least occasional shops), generally pleasant
environment (e.g. alongside green space), safety (both from accidents
with motor vehicles and in terms of crime).

I think Marylebone High St is a good example of a good walking road
which is easily overlooked on an A-Z. It's interesting with various
shops, restaurants and cafes (an interesting street probably feels
quicker to walk along, just because there is more to look at), it's easy
to follow, it has good pavements and it links Oxford Street with
Regent's Park.

Regarding what would make a good walking map, I think the Quickmap idea
is a good start (quickmap.com/walk2learn.htm - click on the last box of
the Flash movie). I don't really get on with their other maps that well,
and I prefer a bit more accuracy, but the idea of highlighting key
centres in an obvious manner, simplifying the walking network and
colour-coding types of area (shopping, entertainment etc) is
commendable. In particular, using different size circles to show roughly
the range of transport services on offer, and distinguishing local
centres with both Tube & bus services from those with only bus services
is an excellent idea.

Also, the A-Z is particularly bad since it's split into fairly small
pages - if your journey crosses an edge, or worse still a corner, you're
out of luck. TfL's cycle maps, which are basically the A-Z printed as
sheets (ignore the coloured highlighting if you're on foot), are better,
and certainly excellent for the price.

Actually I know what I'd like. I find the street maps displayed at
Tube and rail stations - especially the TfL one's that have a street
index - and even those simple one's shown on main bus stops - really
handy at times when I know I'm broadly in the right place but need to
pinpoint an exact location, or route to that location. So I'd find
similar street maps that show the locality, displayed on the street,
replete with an index, very useful.


Yes, not a bad idea at all.


A gripe I have with existing pedestrian signage is that signs may point
you in the direction of a destination, but fail to confirm that you're
going in the right direction later on. I imagine there's a certain
distance beyond which people begin to doubt whether they followed the
signs correctly - even if they're heading in the right direction. It
must vary from person to person but I think it could happen after ten
minutes or so.

--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London