Streets & Walkways Sub Committee / 18thJuly 2011
Subject: Ludgate Hill Crossing Review - Update Report / Public
Report of: City Planning Officer / For Decision
Summary
The purpose of this report is to present Members with the results of traffic and pedestrianassessments of the Ludgate Hill zebra crossing conducted during February 2011. The assessment includes analysisof pedestrian and traffic modelling for an alternative signalised crossing.
The surveys have enabled Officers to broadly assess the functional effectiveness of the crossing outside the entrance toSt Paul’s and consider the potential impact of changing this to a signalised crossing.
The studies have indicated that most of the disruption to traffic at this location is not directly related to the zebra crossing itself, but to traffic queuing from other downstream junctions. In that respect, although a signalised crossing would, in theory, smooth traffic flow, in reality the traffic capacity of a signalised crossing would also be adversely affected by downstream junctions. Furthermore, as journey times along this corridor are dictated by the performance of the main junction at each end of the corridor (New Change/Cannon Street & Ludgate Hill/Farringdon Street/Fleet Street), a new crossing would have no impact upon overall travel times. Therefore,a signalised crossing at Ludgate Hill would not provide any material improvement in traffic flow.
It is also clear from the studies that implementing a signalised crossing at this location would cause increased disruption to pedestrians (who at 58% of the modal share are by far the heaviest users at this location).
Recommendations
It is recommended that Members note the results of the recent assessment of the Ludgate Hill zebra crossing, and that Members authorise Officers to:
- maintain the status quo with the zebra crossing facility as it is.
Main Report
Background
01.In July 2007 an evaluation report was presented to the Streets & Walkways Sub-Committee that considered pedestrian crossing improvements to the Ludgate Hill zebra crossing. Officers recommendedthat Members approved the retention of the zebra crossing and add additional pedestrian refuges at Dean’s Court and Ave Maria Lane. This recommendation was approved at committee.
02.Since this report a number of complaintshave been received in relation to the zebra crossing at Ludgate Hill. The zebra crossing is located in an area of high pedestrian footfall and criticism has focussed upon the perceived impact of the crossing in terms of the delay it is thought to cause to motorised traffic due to the pedestrian priority.
03.Since the 2007 report a significant level of development has occurred in the locality, in particular an increase in the number of cafes and restaurants on the south side of Ludgate Hill and the construction of the One New Change shopping centre.
04.In consideration of the complaints and given the recent development,Members requested that a report be produced investigating this issue. It was therefore decided to undertake a detailed assessment of the crossing, with the aim of assessing the effectiveness of the zebra crossing (for both traffic & pedestrians) and to consider what benefit may be realised from introducing a signalised crossing at this location. A consultant was appointed to undertake the necessary surveys and assess the issue.Much of the study focussed on lunchtime pedestrian flows; as previous data suggested this was the peak period of pedestrian activity.
05.Figure 1 provides a location plan of the study area.
Figure 1: Location Plan
Current Position
Status of Ludgate Hill
06.Ludgate Hill is defined in the City of London’s Local Development Framework as a Local Access Road. As such, its function is to serve the locality. Motor vehicles are not encouraged through signage to use Ludgate Hill for through route or local distribution purposes.
Traffic Flow
07.Traffic surveys were undertaken on a weekday in February and April this year.Three distinct peak hour periods were identified – Morning (07:45-08:45), Midday (12:00-13:00) and Evening (18:00-19:00). Surveys were designed in order to understand the volume of vehicular traffic at this location and understand the severity of delays experienced by motorists. Table 1 presents the key findings.
Table 1: Traffic Flows
Period / Total Vehicle Count / Average/Maximum Queue Length Eastbound(passenger car units) / Average/Maximum Queue Length Westbound (passenger car units)MorningPeak / 1,180 / 10/25 / 5/14
MiddayPeak / 959 / 21/32+ / 5/11
EveningPeak / 1,231 / 13/30 / 4/9
08.Total vehicle count is measured in passenger car units (PCU’s). For example, a car represents one PCU,and a bus represents two.Vehicle flows are similar during the morning and evening peaks and slightly lower during the midday peak.The greatest total vehicle count was during the evening peak 1,231 vehicles were counted.These flows are consistent with other City locations.
09.The greatest queue and therefore greatest delay caused to motorised traffic occurred during the midday peak. However, itwas observed on-site that many of these queues were caused by vehicles queuing back from the Cannon Street/New Change junction. Therefore, the eastbound queues during this period cannot be considered to be directly related to the zebra crossing at Ludgate Hill. They are largely influenced by queuing back from the Cannon street/New Change junction.
10.The evening peak had a similar maximum queue length but a far lower average queue length in the eastbound direction. There were no interactions with downstream junctions observed during the evening peak period and it can be assumed that the delay during this period was purely as a result of pedestrians using the zebra crossing.
11.For both periods the delay caused to eastbound motorists was far greater than that caused to those travelling westbound. Comparatively insignificant delays are experienced by westbound motorists.
Analysis of Impact of Pedestrian Crossing on Traffic Flow
12.Following analysis of the traffic counts, in combination with observations on site, Officers have drawn the following conclusions:
- The pedestrian crossing cannot be viewed in isolation: its operation is very much influenced by the operation of other junctions nearby;
- Vehicle queuing is commonplace at both of the major downstream junctions (Cannon Street/New Change & Ludgate Hill/Farringdon Street/Fleet Street). Queuing from these junctions often tails back as far as the Ludgate Hill crossing, affecting its operation; and
- The Ludgate Hill zebra crossing does not materially affect the overall travel time from Ludgate Hill to New Change (or vice versa); the overall travel time is dictated by the eastbound queuing from New Change/Cannon Street junction and westbound queuing from Ludgate Hill/Farringdon Street/Fleet Street junction.The main traffic impact of the crossing is simply to delay vehicles from joining the back of the queue at the downstream junction.
Pedestrians
13.Pedestrian surveys were undertaken in February.The volume of pedestrian activity on the footways either side of the zebra crossing is significant; for example, at 12:00, 4,500 Pedestrians Per Hour (pph) were counted. This shows Ludgate Hill pedestrian activity to be equivalent to High Holborn and with almost 1,000pph more than London Wall (east of its junction with Moorgate). The high level of pedestrian activity by St Paul’s highlights the importance of pedestrian crossing provision in this area.
14.The number of pedestrians using the zebra crossing varies from 300pph to 1,900pph between 07:00 and 18:00. During each of the three peak periods pedestrian volumes varied between 1,800pph and 1,900pph. This is the equivalent to 30-31 pedestrians per minute.
15.During the lunchtime peak hour over 1,900 pedestrians used the crossing, with an equal split between northbound and southbound movements.
16.In addition, over 950 informal crossings per hour were observed. This represents approximately one third of all pedestrians crossing the road during the midday peak period. In Central London overall the average of informal crossing is 16%. The majority of informal crossing is concentrated along the desire lines between Dean’s Court and the Cathedral with the remainder of informal crossing generally occurring between the shops located on either side of Ludgate Hill. The informal crossing points identified are illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Informal crossing during the InterPeak period
Modal Split
17.The modal split of all users of Ludgate Hill was examined east of the junction with Ave Maria Lane during the midday peak period. Table 2 provides the breakdown.
Table 2: Modal split during the midday peak period
Mode / Share of Modal SplitPedestrians / 58%
Bus Passengers / 30%
Taxis / 6%
Car Occupants / 2%
Goods Vehicles / 2%
Cycles / 1%
Motorcycles / 1%
18.Proportionally, pedestrians represent by far the greatest user group with almost two thirds of users moving through the junction on foot. Bus passenger’s account for a third of the modal split (an average occupancy of 15.9 people per bus was confirmed during this survey), private car drivers and passengers accounted for only 2% of all users.
19.This demonstrates that pedestrians are by far the most numerous users of the highway in this area, and emphasises the requirement to adequately cater for their needs.
Accidents
20.Accident data has been obtained for the study area for the previous three year period. Of the 14relevant accidents in the immediate vicinity of the crossing no clear trends are identifiable.
21.The main focus for concern is conflict between vehicles turning in and out of Ave Maria Laneand in particular motorists not seeing cyclists or motorcycles.It can be surmised that the crossing as it exists does not require alteration on safety grounds.
Introducing aSignalised Crossing
22.As part of the study, the impact of a formalised crossing was forecast using standard modelling software in order to gauge whether or not it would deliver significant benefits over the existing arrangement.
23.The results of this modelling demonstrated that a signalised junction would have the following impacts:
- Vehicles would experiencelocal reduced queuing(but notePara 24);
- Pedestrians would experience longer journey times of approximately 40 seconds on average per person; and
- Congestion would be generated on the footways either side of the crossing as pedestrians waited for the green man signal. On the southern footway, the available width would be reduced to 1.4m creating unsatisfactory conditions for pedestrians.
24.It is important to note that the modelling software used to assess the crossing cannot take into account interactions between the crossing and other junctions/crossings in the area that were found to have an impact during the on-site surveys. Consequently, the modelling considerably over estimates the efficiency of a signalised crossing at this location, and therefore underestimates the queuing that would actually occur due to traffic blocking from other downstream junctions.
25.It would be possible to mitigate the impact on pedestrian congestion at the crossing by widening the footway on the southern side. Alternatively, the crossing operating cycle could be sped up to enable more frequent pedestrian crossing and reduce footway congestion. This would, however, diminish the benefit to vehicles.
Visual Impact
26.The Ludgate Hill crossing is located in a very sensitive location. St Paul’s is Grade I listed, and the most important architectural and historic building in the City.
27.A signalised crossing would be intrusive, with the additional street furniture required adversely impacting upon the view and setting of the Cathedral.
28.It should be noted that when changes to the crossing were considered previously in 2007, theSurveyor/Architect for the fabrics of St Paul’s Cathedral was consulted. St Paul’s strongly objected on the grounds of the visual impact that the changes would have. It is likely that their position on this remains unchanged.
Impacts Comparison
29.Table 3 provides a comparison of the impacts of the zebra crossing at Ludgate Hill versus the impacts that would be likely to occur as a result of introducing a signalised crossing at this location.
Table 3: Impact Comparison
Zebra Crossing / Signalised CrossingDelay to Traffic / ×× / ×
Delay to Pedestrians / √ / ××
Pedestrian Accidents / ס / ס
Pedestrian Comfort / √ / ×
Street Clutter & Visual Impact / × / ××
√goodסneutral×poor××verypoor
Financial and Risk Implications
30.Initial estimates suggest that replacing the zebra crossing with a signalised crossing would cost in the region of £100,000. This figure allows for minor kerb line adjustments and includes works, fees and staff costs. A more detailed cost estimate would need to be provided as part of any evaluation. Given the results of this assessment, it is unlikely that changing the crossing justifies this level of expenditure.
Consultees
31.The Director of Environmental Services, The Finance Officer andThe Road Safety Officer have been consulted in the preparation of this report.
Conclusion
32.The assessment has identified that the zebra crossing at Ludgate Hill operates acceptably for its role on a Local Access Road, with levels of traffic and pedestrian flow consistent with that of other such streets in the City. While delay to eastbound traffic at the zebra crossing was observed, much of this was not caused by the zebra crossing at Ludgate Hill but by queues from the Cannon Street/New Change junction. The heavy utilisation of this crossing by pedestrians undoubtedly causes some very localised delay to motorists during peak periods but this does not increase overall travel times between Ludgate Hill and New Change.
33.Pedestrians are the largest single group of users of Ludgate Hill; the zebra crossing enables them to cross with limited waiting. It is important that any decision on the crossing facilities at Ludgate Hill prioritises their needs.
34.Other than on a very localised basis, a signalised crossing at this location would not reduce delays overall to motorists. Overall vehicle travel times across this corridor would remain the same. However, pedestrian movement and comfort would undoubtedly suffer. A signalised crossing would provide no safety improvement. A signalised crossing would also impact negatively on the important view and settingof St Paul’s Cathedral.
Contact:
Geoffrey Pluck
020 7332 1471
h:\committees\p&t-sw\reports\2011\110718\ludgate hill crossing review final.doc