Overview [EXHIBITION ROAD]

44 BETTER STREETS REVIEW | Transport for London

EXHIBITION ROAD

Attracting over 11million visitors each

year, Exhibition Road is home to a unique collection

of educational and cultural institutions including the

Victoria and Albert Museum, the Natural History

and Science Museums, the Royal Albert Hall and

Imperial College London. The streetscape

improvements aim to reflect Prince Albert’s legacy;

enabling access to culture and learning for people of

all backgrounds and ages.

A single surface design with the minimum of street

furniture and barriers, seeks to provide greater

flexibility for future use, while prioritising the

pedestrian. The concept involves having a less

delineated route for through traffic, encouraging

motorists to drive more cautiously, adhere to the

20mph limit and give greater consideration for

pedestrians.

It was a question of how this road could become more of a street.

Edward Jones, Dixon Jones Architects

The Council engaged with a number of disabled

groups and professionals designing the project to

reconcile the needs of a range of users. At the

forefront of the design concept is a commitment to

accessibility and quality.

Construction February 2010 – December 2011

Date completed December 2011

Designer Dixon Jones Architects

Funding breakdown Total cost: £25million

TfL £13.3million

Summary A new high quality streetscape has been developed to favour

the pedestrian, with a kerb-free single surface provided

along the length of the road. Visual and tactile lines

distinguish pedestrian ‘comfort zones’ and a 20mph speed

limit is in effect.

Project milestones Exhibition Road project launched February 2010

The first of the patterned granite is laid June 2010

Transport for London confirm their plans for buses in South Kensington September 2010

South Kensington joins the cycle hire scheme November 2010

National Grid finish their work on Cromwell Road January 2011

New paving programme February 2011

New trees planted outside Montrose Court and South Kensington station March 2011

The first seven new lighting masts are installed May 2011

South Kensington opens for business June 2011

Real life testing proves that corduroy delineator works July 2011

All the new lighting masts are installed September 2011

Traffic running in new permanent arrangement October 2011

Before October 2008

After November 2011

[EXHIBITION ROAD] Profile and Function

Transport for London | BETTER STREETS REVIEW 45

PROFILE AND FUNCTION

A raised table and change in paving materiality

demarcates the edge of Exhibition Road, with a one-

way system operating to the south of Thurloe Place.

Signalised crossings are used for Thurloe Place and

Cromwell Road; the distinctive paving treatment

ends to highlight vehicle priority on these roads.

Cycle storage, parking facilities and seating are

provided in a ‘transition zone’, with a two-way

system on one side of the road.

The road operates as a single surface with corduroy

paving and bollards used to delineate the

pedestrian space from the carriageway. At bus

stops, 100mm kerbs are provided.

Benches are positioned on the western side of the

street, opening out the footway while enabling

vehicles to enter the junction.

Pedestrians are able to walk freely in between

parking bays and street furniture. Large lighting

columns serve to partially separate this zone from

the two-way traffic flow.

The junction with Prince Consort Road marks the

change from two lanes of traffic southbound to one

lane of traffic southbound.

Despite the uniform paving, the street takes on a

more regular configuration north of the junction

with Prince Consort Road and pedestrians tend to

adhere more strictly to the comfort zones.

1 3 5 7

2 4 6 8

2 5 7 8

1 3 4 6

Site Analysis [EXHIBITION ROAD]

46 BETTER STREETS REVIEW | Transport for London

MATERIALS

Chequered granite paving lines the width of the

road, with corduroy tactile paving and dark drainage

strips used to delineate the pedestrian only zone.

Left: Stainless steel markers for car parking bays.

Right: Bollards primarily protect the basement.

Road markings have been used at major junctions

and in restricted parking zones. Note the use of

standard width red lines, rather than narrow ones.

Bollards are used at the roundabout to indicate a

change in the road system.

Left: Dual aspect lighting next to smaller buildings.

Right: Large lighting columns as a visual statement.

Benches are positioned in the transition zone and

frame the entrances of minor junctions.

DESIGN ISSUES

Bollards do not offer a suitable alternative to a kerb,

as this series of broken bollards exemplifies.

There is an overuse of signage at the Prince Consort

Road junction, where a change in traffic system is in

effect.

SITE INTERACTION

The majority of surveyed users were tourists and

less than half of those knew the street before being

redesigned. Students made up the rest of the

demographic and most were aware of its previous

configuration, considering it ‘average’ to ‘good’.

75% of all users considered the streetscape to be

‘good’ across the board; however many commented

that it ‘could be better’. A large proportion wanted

the street to be completely pedestrianised, while

others thought speed bumps would be necessary to

slow cars down more effectively.

The new street is culturally appropriate; it feels important. German tourist There is a lack of clarity about how it should be used. Edward Chan,

Imperial College student

What a funny road, Mummy. Child on scooter

Signage is largely

temporary, however its

abundance suggests the

new road design is

ambiguous.

Westminster, RBKC and

Imperial College will

monitor the road usage

for up to two years and

assess its safety, to see

if any changes are

necessary.

[DESIGN TRENDS] DATA SUMMARY

Transport for London | BETTER STREETS REVIEW 47

BETTER STREETS SUMMARY

DESIGN TRENDS

The Better Streets approach endorses a

staged process for redesigning the street. The

schemes examined in this review have all adopted

this methodology, with interventions aimed at

delivering design solutions to context-specific

problems. The projects vary considerably regarding

how far they go towards reimagining the street. In

some cases the design brief may not necessitate a

complete transformation; however other projects

have fully employed this blank canvas strategy. The

following design trends are common to varying

degrees across the 15 projects and essentially

summarise the principles of Better Streets.

TIDY UP

This process involves the removal of unnecessary

road markings and simple street furniture. Central

lines may be removed, as well as give way markings.

The approach has been employed across all of the

examined schemes and is particularly successful on

Camden High Street, Orpington Town Centre and

Station Road, Harrow. The ‘tidy up’ process is the

least costly as the footway does not require repair,

although the majority of the Better Streets projects

have incorporated more extensive remodelling.

The lack of road markings and street signage on

Camden High Street provides a clean backdrop for

the bustling shopfronts.

DE-CLUTTER

There is a presumption in favour of removal of

street furniture unless a clear reason for retention is

provided. This has been achieved with mixed

success across the schemes. For example in Sutton,

a large number of bollards, bins and signposts

obstruct pedestrian flow.

Street clutter continues to plague the streets of

Sutton Town Centre.

RELOCATE & MERGE FUNCTIONS

Features such as signposts, railings and seats can be

installed in furniture zones adjacent to the

carriageway, to provide a clear footway for

improved navigation. Merging of functions can also

help to de-clutter the street; for example by

attaching multiple signs to a single post. This

process can be applied to lighting strategies;

mounting lights to buildings to further reduce the

number of poles at street level. All of these

initiatives require careful design consideration, with

many of the Better Streets benefitting from a series

of design reviews to guide the design process and

streamline the location and style of street furniture.

NEW TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

This report has identified the importance of looking

at how vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists use the

street, and the processes required to best address

the priorities for these users. In many cases this has

involved the widening of pavements and the

slowing of traffic with raised tables and speed

restrictions. In other schemes there has been a

simplification of traffic regimes, reverting to

traditional two-way roads.

Changing the road network function can have a

wider knock-on effect for traffic elsewhere,

inherently requiring evaluation and modelling to

provide the best solutions. Schemes such as Oxford

Road have incorporated extensive traffic

management alterations, including the relocation of

bus stops and services, in order to facilitate the

introduction of key design concepts; a diagonal

crossing in this instance. Herne Hill is another

scheme which has sought to reduce congestion at a

major intersection. In general it has been seen that

majority of these flagship projects have

implemented some form of new traffic

arrangement. These tend to prioritise pedestrians

and public transport, while simplifying road layouts

to smooth traffic flows.

In Harrow, Station Road has been straightened and

two-way traffic has returned to provide a more

intuitive arrangement for pedestrians and vehicles.

RECREATE THE STREET

Some schemes such as Exhibition Road and Venn

Street have taken the Better Streets philosophy a

step further by completely redesigning the street.

Although only suitable for certain sites, this

ambitious approach can transform the quality of a

space and implant wholly new place-making

attributes. Venn Street for example has replaced

parking bays with a shared surface, capable of

accommodating cafe seating and market stalls.

High quality materials and good workmanship are

essential for providing a scheme which is durable

and easy to maintain. These schemes are usually

the most costly but can be justified by the inherent

community value they offer through increased

social vibrancy and functional diversity.

Before: Courtesy of Ian Hingley, Urban Initiatives

After: Venn Street was completely remodelled by

creating a shared surface with vehicle restrictions.

DATA SUMMARY [USER FEEDBACK]

48 BETTER STREETS REVIEW | Transport for London

USER FEEDBACK SUMMARY

The graphs highlight the performance of

each scheme from the results of the user questionnaire (see methodology, page 3). Lighter colours denote a more positive response to the streetscape. For each of the categories: ‘quality’, ‘balance’ and ‘ease of use’, participants were asked to select from the spectrum: ‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘average’ and ‘poor’. Further details were also noted including how frequently they visited the street and why they came there.

The overall results for ‘quality of environment’ suggest that the majority of the Better Streets schemes are considered above average with Venn Street, General Gordon Square and Gillett Square receiving the highest scores, while Sutton, Harrow and Elephant & Castle received the lowest. One can hypothesise why this might be the case: Venn Street and the Squares have lower traffic flows, more vegetation and open space. As each respondent was offering their own interpretation of what ‘quality’ entails however, one cannot assume that these were indeed the factors that contributed towards the higher scores. The subjective nature of the study, the small sample size and the variability of results, suggests that inferences regarding causation should not be made by the examiner.

Relative to the quality of environment

results, participants generally considered the balance of the streetscape to be poorer. Greenford, Richmond and Harrow came out with the lowest ratings, while the schemes in Clapham excelled in this category. Most people who responded negatively cited those schemes as ‘missed opportunities’ and called for more radical measures to address issues of vehicle congestion and pedestrian priority.

The ‘ease of use’ data shows that all schemes were considered to be above average, except for Richmond Town Centre. The highest scores were again observed in Gillett Square and the Clapham projects. Users frequently commented that uneven footways and busy roads particularly impacted on the perceived ease of use.

Exhibition Road received consistently ‘good’ marks across the board.

In many cases, users were not aware that changes had occurred but still rated the streetscape as being better after the changes. This response is contradictory and suggests that people may assume that change is inherently positive. Those with a stronger viewpoint and greater knowledge of the works were more inclined to emphasise their views by marking categories especially high or low, while others noticeably less concerned marked the schemes as ‘good’ or ‘average’.

It is easy to over-analyse the user perception results and draw out conclusions relating to psychology which are not relevant or over-simplified. This data should therefore be viewed with a critical eye and an appreciation of its context and initial objectives: to examine how successfully the designs respond to the demands of its users.

The graph to the right provides perhaps the most useful summary of the results, by displaying the change in perception for schemes overall. It is encouraging to see that all the projects received positive results, suggesting that in general, the Better Streets schemes live up to their name: user feedback shows they are indeed ‘better’.

(Note: no data was collected for Orpington and Carting Lane)

Gillett Square stands out as having the highest positive change in attitude towards the street, closely followed by Venn Street. It can be seen that in general, schemes exhibit a positive improvement rate of around 30%.

[PROJECT VALUE] DATA SUMMARY

Transport for London | BETTER STREETS REVIEW 49

PROJECT VALUE

‘Valuing urban realm’ studies have been

conducted by Transport for London since 2006 to

assess the business case for justifying public space

improvements. It has been statistically shown that

the general public value high quality streets and are

willing to spend money on achieving higher

standards of public realm. Less extensive

interventions such as de-cluttering the street have

also been shown to offer a more viable business

case than completely reimagining the street, based

on the change in user response.

This section considers the ‘value’ of the Better

Streets projects by assessing whether the user

perception feedback data correlates with the

project cost.

SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS

Total Cost £ million

Total Size m

2

Cost per m2

£

Oxford Street 5.35 5688 940

Coulsdon 3 9608 312

Plumstead Road 2.5 5340 468

New Road 1.2 2713 442

General Gordon Sq 2.1 5336 394

Greenford 4.4 20193 218

Camden 1.6 6331 253

Orpington 2.2 9183 240

Herne Hill 1.702 7683 222

Sutton 3.2 12512 256

Carting Lane 0.7 1055 663

Gillett Square 1.4 1701 823

Clapham Junction St 1.4 1871 748

Venn Street 0.35 960 365

Lavender Hill 1.27 5819 218

Elephant & Castle 2.88 2753 1046

Richmond 3.9 8848 441

Harrow 3.23 6947 465

Exhibition Road 25 20065 1246

Note: Total size and cost per m2 are approximate values

based on GIS mapping data.

The approximate cost per square metre

was calculated to provide a baseline for assessing

the ‘value’ of each scheme. The total project costs

vary considerably from a low of ~£218/m2 for

Greenford Town Centre and Lavender Hill, to

~£1246/m2 for Exhibition Road.

The cost per m2 has been calculated as a crude

indicative value for each scheme and should not be

taken as the surface cost. Exhibition Road and

Elephant & Castle may appear to have cost the most

per m2 but these projects have had considerable

subterranean work, which inherently skews the

data. The results do however show that the

majority of schemes are being implemented at a

mean cost of approximately £460/ m2.

Projects such as Sutton Town Centre, widely

criticised for costing too much money, in fact have a

relatively low cost per m2. This does not necessarily

equate to good ‘value’ however, as user perception

and attitude is fundamental to this outcome, as well

as the subsequent economic benefits.

As displayed on page 48, the % change in user

perception of each scheme is positive for all of the

Better Streets. By charting this variable against the

project cost, it can be concluded that there is a very

weak positive correlation between the cost of each

scheme and the change in perceived quality

(indicated by the R2 value of 0.0639). There is

therefore no statistical evidence to support the

hypothesis that more money spent will produce

streetscapes which have greater levels of perceived

quality.

The results may have been subject to limitations in

the research method, as only 20 participants were

questioned at each location. Furthermore, the cost

data does not take into account numerous factors

regarding construction issues specific to each

scheme and uses GIS data to calculate limits which

is invariably inaccurate. The data does however

show that the schemes have in general been

positively received and further research would help

to quantify this result.

The relatively high cost per square metre for

Elephant & Castle includes the extensive

underground work involved in closing the subway.

Greenford has a particularly low cost per square

metre as the carriageway has received minimal

investment.

By developing this technique of

analysing user attitudes, a more robust dataset can

act as the foundations for future work to assess the

relationship of cost and perceived quality. This can

better quantify the ‘value’ of each scheme and be

used to guide and deliver future projects in the

most economically appropriate manner, grounded

by a strong evidence base.

CONCLUSIONS

50 BETTER STREETS REVIEW | Transport for London

LOOKING TO THE FUTURE...

The principles of Better Streets extend

beyond the delivery of a select number of flagship

schemes. Strategies for improving the design and

implementation process are essential for ensuring

that projects attain good results. This report has

sought to provide a supporting document for

fulfilling the Better Streets agenda by contributing

towards the research and monitoring of existing

schemes, and helping to guide the delivery of future

proposals. 2012 is set to be an even busier year for

public realm projects than 2011, with more than 20

Better Streets under construction, not to mention

the ongoing works of the High Street 2012 project in

Tower Hamlets.

A number of formal assessments have also been

commissioned for 2012, examining a range of socio-

economic impacts. These include reports by TfL’s

Road Safety Unit, DfT’s assessment of Traffic Sign

Regulations and a study of the effectiveness of

designs for disabled users by University College

London. All of these documents seek to offer

guidance for improving future designs of Better

Streets, while identifying opportunities to fine-tune

the design and management of existing schemes.

The following list highlights the range of flagship

projects to be overseen by the Borough Projects and

Programmes team in 2012.

This review has highlighted the

importance of designing schemes in the context of

the wider urban fabric. Projects should not be

viewed in isolation but as part of a network of

public spaces, contributing towards a higher quality

living environment. Application of the Better

Streets design philosophy can be expanded to

provide a more consistent streetscape approach

across the City, in turn improving the usability and

efficiency of the street network. As more areas of

London incorporate ‘naked street’ principles and

interventions such as ‘shared surfaces’, users will

become increasingly familiar and comfortable with

how the street network is changing.

This report has also shown that a large budget is not

a necessary pre-requisite for creating what is

perceived as a high quality place; although larger

funding streams can enable greater flexibility in

fulfilling design priorities. A more significant aspect

for attaining a Better Street is to provide a clear

project brief, backed up by contextual research,

public engagement and best practice guidance.

As mentioned in the ‘Design Trends’, a staged

approach has been advocated to encourage careful

design consideration for each component of the

streetscape. In some cases this has been done

particularly well, for example in Venn Street where

a change in materiality and removal of kerbs has

allowed for a shared space. Indeed the shared

surface approach in London remains contentious as

designs have not adopted a consistent application.

Exhibition Road incorporates a ‘single surface’ but

cannot be strictly classed as a ‘shared surface’ as it

has distinct activity zones. Coulsdon Town Centre

has a junction akin to a shared surface, although in

fact prioritises vehicles. These subtle contrasts in

terminology and confusion in application translates

to confusion for the user. It is therefore vital that a

system of design reviews is employed for major

schemes, which build on the knowledge acquired

from observing existing Better Streets.

The street network is the foundation of our

City; ever-changing and under increasing pressure

from a growing population. New designs need to

reflect this temporal dimension of the urban

landscape by anticipating future demands on these

connections. Good design and detailing has been

shown to significantly improve the lifespan of a

street and ease maintenance, so it is vital to draw

on the experience of existing projects to further the

design quality of future schemes. It is hoped that

this review has clarified the design approach for

achieving a Better Street, and can be used to

stimulate ever improving processes of street design.

When we have streets we want to walk in, lives are transformed – we are healthier, happier and more sociable.

Julia Crear, Living Streets

Good design and creative thinking... can ensure that change is managed in a well thought out way that brings tangible benefits to everyone. Boris Johnson,

Mayor of London

Clapham Gateway Regeneration Project

(Images courtesy of Lambeth City Council)

Leicester Square

Westminster

This scheme has been developed by Westminster City Council to transform the central gardens and terraces. It will cost up to £17 million and TfL will contribute £3 million. Design work started in 2008/09 and continued in 2009/10. Implementation should be completed by 2012.

Total cost: £17m TfL (Major Schemes) £3m

Mar-12

St Paul's Environs

City This project aims to enhance the environment at one of the busiest visitor attractions in London and to improve connections to the Barbican and the River Thames.

Total cost: £5m TfL (Major Schemes) £1.4m for St Paul's Gateway £1.2m for Carter Lane

Mar-12

Kingsland High Street

Hackney Improved pedestrian links to the new Dalston Kingsland ELL station. Includes wider footways through the removal of a bus lane.

Total cost: £2.2m TfL (Major Schemes) £1.3m LDA £900k

Mar-12

Britannia Junction

Camden (TLRN)

Transformation of junction to the south of Camden Town Tube station. Creation of a new public space, simplified crossing and traffic arrangements and wider footways.

Total cost: £1.1m TfL (Major Schemes) £900k

Apr-12

Wimbledon Town Centre

Merton Improvements to pedestrian permeability and accessibility. Installation of a diagonal crossing at Alexandra Road/St George's Road.

Total cost: £2.1m TfL (Major Schemes) £828k

Apr-12

Jubilee Gardens

Lambeth Delivery of a high quality live site during 2012 Olympic Games time and a legacy of high quality pedestrian links to the Thames.

Total cost: £4.6m TfL (Major Schemes) £1.5m

May-12

Sydenham Lewisham

Re-balancing traffic for pedestrians whilst maintaining through traffic movements. Measures include: footway widening, better crossings and 'pocket' squares. Links to ELLX at Sydenham Street.

Total cost: £2.48m TfL £2.18m

Jun-12

Clapham Gateway

Lambeth

Transformation of 'Clapham Old Town' area including removal of one-way working (to two way) and relocation of bus stand to enable more public space and improved pedestrian routes to Venn Street market

Total cost: TBC TfL £2.874m Borough funding >£650k

2012

Bexleyheath Town Centre

Bexley

Opening up of existing pedestrianised area to create shared space with buses and taxis, together with improved linkages to commercial area from surrounding residential catchments and station.

Total cost: £4.393m TfL £3.293m £2.5m Major Schemes

Mar-13

Transport for London | BETTER STREETS REVIEW

Thank you to everyone at the Borough Projects and

Programmes team at Transport for London, for their

constructive comments and assistance in producing

this report. I would like to express my particular

gratitude to Anthony O’Keeffe for his guidance and

to Esther Kurland and the UDL team for their

support. I wish to extend my thanks to all those

involved in this report from principal designer to

public participant; without your time and help,

completion of this document would not have been

possible.

Gordon Fyfe Webster

www.urbandesignlondon.com gordon.f.webster@gmail.com

Palestra 197 Blackfriars Road

London SE1 8NJ

© urbandesignlondon 2012