Methodology-
Pedestrian counts-
We used this to indicate how many people were in the core or frame. This is a particularly helpful method because it shows the land use of the core and frame. It was important that we all counted pedestrians at the same time. We predicted that there would be more people in the core than the frame as the core has more attractions within it.
Firstly, we counted how many people walked past in one direction for 2 minutes and then the other way for 2 minutes. We recorded this on our survey sheet. We noted down what the weather was like and which way the pedestrian were going. We counted the amount of pedestrians that walked past a certain place for 2 minutes and then compared results and estimated them to get a rounded figure.
Environment quality surveys-
We used this to help us to find out how each section of the city is treated. This will help us with our aim of rating the environmental factors. We would expect there to be more litter within the core, as there are more people to drop litter. Yet we might expect more vandalism outside of the core, in the frame, this could be because there are less security camera and people to watch the vandals.
We did this by simply observing the environment around us and graded it on our survey sheet from 1-4 (poor-good).This also helped with information with our pedestrian count ,we would expect more people ,more litter.
Observations-
This simply helped us mind mapping the city visually to detect where the Core and Frame were. (Sketches, pictures).This is relevant because it helped us to visualise the core and frame and made us think about factors that could affect the popularity of the core and the frame. If the core or frame were particularly messy, unattractive areas then we would expect less people to go there. We could see from our sketches and photographs if this was the case.
We drew a large main picture on out survey sheet and then labelled it with relevant information such as; new development, litter sites and popular areas for people.
Land use mapping of two streets-
This helps us to indicate the shops and stores used in both areas. This could help us to find out the boundaries between the core and frame, the larger shops would be in the frame and smaller shops, restaurants etc would be in the frame. The big stores were mainly in the core and smaller ones in the frame. We wanted to know if the type of shop affected where the shop is situated, and to see how popular bigger shops were in the frame were and vice versa with the smaller shops.
We showed this information by recording all the shops down each street and allocating them with a letter to symbolise which type of shop it was .i.e. national branch/smaller shops/cafes etc. There were different symbols for different types of shops. This helped us to find out the land use in the core and the frame.
Visit to princesshay redevelopment centre-
This gave us some background information on the new development of princess hay. We new that this complex would have an affect on the current C.B.D. We needed to know what Implications would take place in order to maintain a core and frame model within Exeter.
We carried this out by visiting the office and asking relevant questions about the new development, we collected many leaflets and letter to help us to fully understand the changes taking place.
Data presentation
(exel)
Data interpretation
The land use maps showed that in the high street there were a high percentage of clothing shops , specialist shops and major shopping units. This is because it is in the core of Exeter and is the most popular part of the core frame. There seems to be large clusters of similar shops together this is perhaps because of the competition within the high street ,which is very common in the core part of a city. This largely contrasts to
queens street where there are far less clothing and major shops than in the high street. The highest type is catering services. Showing fewer attractions for busy shoppers and proves that queen street is a less populated part of the city-the frame. There are more personal shops in Queens Street such a solicitors and estate agents .This again shows more characteristics of the frame as it is a less densely populated area .
-This can be seen clearly in the pie charts.
The pie chart clearly shows that the main land use in
the high street are specialist shops and clothing stores. They both cover 30% of the streets land use. Compared with Queens Street, which has 7% for both clothing stores and specialist shops. The second highest shop type is professional services with 13%.
This land use largely contrasts to Queens Street where the highest land use is catering with 30% of the land use. Compared with only 1% on the high street.The second highest in Queens street is personal shops.
These results show perfectly the difference between the core and the frame. The high street (the core) has more major shops and retail companies This is because the high street has a higher influx of people wanting to buy more who are there top shop specifically.Whereas Queen Street (the frame)there are more catering services and personal shops. This is because the pedestrians there want more specific needs that to just “shop” such as eating, professional shops, personal shops such as solicitors and estate agents.
Environmental surveys
These helped to indicate where the core and the frame were in many different ways. Predicted that the core would have more litter than the frame, our environmental surveys showed this. In the high street shop design and traffic was the best. This is because the retail companies need to attract as much attention to the shops as possible. Traffic was also every good because only buses are allowed in the high street therefore not creating congestion .Noise and litter were particularly low. This is because of the amount of people using the high street, there is bound to be more litter from them. Noise was obvious because if there are more people then there will be more noise. There was a high rate of street furniture in the high street. This is to accommodate the high amount of people using the core.(see below)
Seating area for busy shoppers
Litter
Queens Street. The environmental surveys taken here were in large contrast to the high street. Litter was not so much of a problem as there appeared to be less people within this zone. There were lots of street flowers perhaps because it was safer to put it here rather than the busy high street. However there appeared to be more vandalism and no street furniture.. The street furniture was clear because there would be less people to use them whilst in the frame.
Vandalism is probably and issues as there are
fewer cameras here and not so many
people to see, resulting in more graffiti etc
It is difficult to say which street has the best
environmental factors as they both have equal
amounts in different parts. However it is easy
to see why the different streets have issues
in certain places. The core has more litter and noise but less traffic and vandalism. This contrasts to the frame which is the opposite.
Pedestrian counts:
Location: Waterstones In 2mins 10:00
South west-20(into core)
North west-15(into frame)
Location :jjb sports 2mins 11:00
North east-23(into frame)
South east-32(into core)
Location: South Street Athena 2mins 12:00
East-34 (into core)
West-18 (into frame)
Evaluation:
Land use maps
The method we use was very accurate because we could see which shops were directly in front of us and then note them down. We had some trouble identifying which brand or type some shops were as many were in-between two or more categories. This is where our method may not be completely fair as we did not get definite type of shop written down. If we wanted to we could have gone inside the shop and asked the owner. This would have given a reliable accurate result, yet would have been very time consuming and sometimes not necessary. However the land map use does match up to our predictions of the types of shops. As we only studied a few streets it would be unfair to draw a precise conclusion. Researching other streets would further our evidence and help us to make a better conclusion. I think we could have improved this by researching more streets in Exeter and making sure we had the correct type of shop written down.
Pedestrian counts
Our method used was very poor and inaccurate. I didn’t think we counted for long enough or accurately. However this was hard to do as we were pushed for time and had to move on to other things quickly. It is also very difficult to draw conclusions when you have taken counts from different time’s f the day. The morning may be extremely busy and then by mid afternoon the numbers may have completely changed. It was impossible to get a reliable result when it must change everyday and every minute. We could have improved this by doing pedestrian counts in time slots .for example form 9-10, 11-12 and so on. Then we could average the score and get a more reliable result. However this would have taken all day too do and would have been very tedious and boring .We also should have increased the time we counted as 2 minutes is not long enough and wouldn’t have given us a reliable result.
Environmental quality surveys
I think that our method worked well, it was an easy survey to do and quite reliable. It was easy to see which part had more litter /vandalism etc. However we were doing this in a group so some people may find litter more disgusting than others and give different marks according to their opinions. Other factors such as the weather may affect mood of the surveyors. It is hard to compare results that different people have decided on, so it is impossible to ever reach one conclusion. The environment surveys will also change day to day and we have only got a few surveys in a small section of Exeter. However the surveys seem to match up to our predictions and made sense according to the core and frame outlines. If we wanted to improve this method we would have to do the survey over the course of a few days and get many different peoples opinions to come to an average. We would also have to do the survey in different streets around Exeter to get and overall result.
Overall it would appear that the core frame model applies to Exeter. We have shown this in all the investigations we carried out. However some of our methods were weak in places and could have done with more time and attention to achieve perfect results. Yet the methods we used and all our findings lead me to believe that the core frame model does apply to Exeter.
Vikesh Patel