Station's Confused Forecourt is a Winner

[madhattie]

From the Bristol Evening Post

The busy and seemingly chaotic forecourt at Temple Meads station has been named as one of the best examples of public space in England.Architecture, urban design and public space experts said deliberate confusion about which areas were for traffic and which were for pedestrians was a safety feature.

They said the fact people had to walk through traffic to reach the car park in the middle of the station approach, made drivers and pedestrians take greater care. There have been no major accidents in 13 years.

Now a group which advises the Government has said other towns and cities could learn much from the way the Temple Meads forecourt was remodelled back in the 1990s.

CABE - the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment - has included the forecourt in a report out today which highlights 10 examples countrywide of historic spaces being used well.

CABE said most station forecourts were "dismal disappointments" even though they often provided visitors with a first impression of a city or town. Many were filled with clutter and dominated by traffic where pedestrians were frequently regarded as an inconvenience.

But Louise Duggan, an adviser at CABE, said: "Temple Meads demonstrates what can be achieved through the use of simple measures of good quality and careful design to enhance its historic setting."

The report, published as part of CABE's Design Better Streets campaign, said the forecourt at Temple Meads replaced a formless expanse, dominated by parked cars, signs, road markings and cheap municipal lighting.

It said: "The space is very busy with cars, buses, taxis and pedestrians arriving and leaving the train station. A decision was taken to create a much more attractive place and use the 'chaos' as a safety device in itself, creating deliberate confusion about which space is for vehicles and which for pedestrians.

"Pedestrians are encouraged to walk across the traffic to reach the car park in the centre of the space. This introduces uncertainty, slows traffic and makes the pedestrians take greater care."

Ms Duggan said: "Some disabled people, particularly visually impaired people, have concerns about the safety of designs like this where there is not a clear distinction between spaces for pedestrians and motorists. We can't claim that they have got it 100 per cent right in the scheme but their innovative approach is a brave move towards developing better practice."

Elaine Wilde, of First Great Western, which manages the station, said: "It does appear a bit chaotic but it all works and we're pleased it has been highlighted in this report."

[horace]

The design of the forecourt was forced on BTM by the good old BDC who paid for it and Planning restrictions it was not designed to be a mix of traffic and pedestrians. If that was the case why did not the BDC carry this design philosophy throughout all of its schemes and remove all pedestrian handrails throughout bristol to allow cars and pedestrian traffic to mix freely. What amazes me is that it has taken over 12 years to recognise this. It like the village street people want the parked cars removed because they consider it hazardous, then they want the traffic through the villages slowed because there is nothing to slow it, then they get traffic calming to slow it, then they complain about cars stopping and starting at the chicanes and the traffic calming is removed, round and round we go. Temple meads forecourt actually changed very little when the new scheme was introduced. It has always been similar to what it is now, it works because it is confusing, just like the village street full of parked cars and skips etc. etc. nobody is to sure of what will happen next.