The Royal Parks 2004 Research Report: 1) In-park Visitor Survey 2) Visitor Telephone Survey 3) Non-Visitor Telephone Survey Greenwich Park, Bushy Park,

The Royal Parks 2004 Research Report:

1) In-park Visitor Survey2) Visitor Telephone Survey3) Non-Visitor Telephone Survey

Greenwich Park, Bushy Park, St James’s Park & Green Park

Prepared for: The Royal ParksPrepared by: Synovate UKJN: 940393(01/02), 941039Date: December 2004

Structure of Report

Background & Business Objectives

Research Objectives

Methodology

Summary of Findings

Conclusions & Recommendations

Research Findings

– In-park Visitor Survey

– Visitor Telephone Survey

– Non-visitor Telephone Survey

Background & Business Objectives

The Royal Parks wished to put in place a significantly enhanced Visitor Research Programme, starting in 2004, to contribute towards achieving its 2003/4 – 2005/6 Business Objectives, as well as guiding future strategies and Park programmes.

The Business Objectives can be summarised as follows:

To improve the quality and range of visitor services

To protect, conserve and enhance the environment of the Parks

To develop policies and initiatives to encourage wider use of the Parks

To raise the profile, understanding & value of the Parks

To manage the Parks efficiently and effectively

Research Objectives

There are a number of objectives, divided into three tiers of importance:

Primary Objectives1. To continue measuring against Government KPI targets, as well as establishing new improved

measures and indicators, and benchmarks for them;2. To gain an understanding of the decision process that visitors go through when considering visiting

the Parks, and how visitors can be influenced to visit the Parks;3. To investigate barriers to park use and how non- and infrequent users can be encouraged to visit the

Parks;4. To segment and characterise users, infrequent users and non-users;5. To provide robust visitor count data, including the number of overseas visitors;

Secondary Objectives6. To determine the effect of weather and season on Park use and perceptions;7. To investigate which facilities and services visitors expect or would like that are not currently offered;

Tertiary Objectives8. To benchmark The Royal Parks against other (Metropolitan) Parks and attractions (esp. free ones);9. To gain feedback on major planned projects;10. To investigate and, if possible, quantify the contribution of the Parks to the quality of life in the capital.

Methodology

Overview Of Programme

20042004 20052005Exploratory Exploratory Qualitative Qualitative ResearchResearch

Greenwich, Bushy, St James’s & Green

Hyde, Regent’s, Richmond, Kensington Gdns

In-park Visitor In-park Visitor SurveySurvey

As above As above

Telephone Visitor Telephone Visitor and Non-Visitor and Non-Visitor

SurveySurvey

As above As above

6 Focus Groups 6 Focus Groups (Issue or Park-(Issue or Park-

based)based)

Visitor Count & Visitor Count & Overseas Visitor Overseas Visitor

CountCount

All 8 Parks (tbc)

How Research Parts Address Objectives

Telephone Visitor Telephone Visitor & Non-Visitor & Non-Visitor

SurveySurvey

Focus GroupsFocus Groups

Exploratory Qualitative Exploratory Qualitative ResearchResearch

Visitor Count & Visitor Count & Overseas Visitor CountOverseas Visitor Count

In-park Visitors SurveyIn-park Visitors Survey

(Exit Interviews)(Exit Interviews)

1. Measure KPI’s

2. Decision process

7. Facilities & services

6. Weather etc.

5. Visitor Count

Provides insights relevant to all objectives and set-up of other research phases

3. Usage Barriers

4. Segment users/non-users

6. Weather & seasons

8. Benchmark against parks etc.

10. Contribution to quality of life

Will provide insights relevant to all objectives

and investigate issues from other research phases

In-Park Visitor Survey

Visitors were interviewed as they left the Parks.

4 Parks were surveyed in 2004, 4 in 2005.

Survey took place in Summer (July and early August) and Autumn (late September to mid October).

‘Next available respondent’ recruitment technique used.

Survey was paper-based, with interviewer reading out questions.

Interview lasted about 10 minutes.

Interviews took place at various times on weekdays, and weekends.

Interviewers rotated around different Park exits.

In 2004 and 2005, c.200 interviews were conducted in each of the 4 Parks in Summer, and c.140 at each in Autumn.

Telephone Visitor and Non-Visitor Survey

Respondents interviewed on the telephone in their homes.

4 Parks surveyed in 2004, 4 in 2005.

Survey took place in October.

Interviewing took place in areas within an agreed defined radius for each of the parks.

Interviews took place in evenings and weekends to ensure no bias to non-workers.

150 interviews amongst non-users per park (who have not visited in the last 12 months).

100 interviews amongst users per park (who have visited in the last 12 months).

Non-users interview lasts 12 mins; users: 6 mins.

Summary of Findings

Summary of Findings (1 of 9)OVERALL RATING OF PARKS

All four Parks are rated very highly on the overall rating, with over 90% of visitors in the In-Park Survey rating each one as either ‘excellent’ or ‘good’.

Greenwich and St James’s are rated highest, and Bushy and Green significantly lower in terms of the ‘excellent’ rating.

Amongst those interviewed in the Visitor’s Telephone Survey, all four Parks except Green are rated very highly (on enjoyment). Greenwich and Bushy are rated highest.

RATING OF PARKS COMPARED TO OTHER PLACES OF INTEREST

Amongst those interviewed in the Telephone Survey, all four Parks except Green are rated as more enjoyable than The Tate Modern, The Tower of London, Madame Taussaud’s and Hyde Park.

Greenwich, Bushy and St James’s are also rated equally enjoyable to The Natural History Museum, but less enjoyable than Kew Gardens.

KPI PERFORMANCE RATINGS (IN-PARK VISITOR SURVEY)

Park Environment (Tidiness & Cleanliness, Upkeep and Peace & Quiet): All four Parks score highly and highest on these aspects. Greenwich scores particularly highly on ‘Tidiness & Cleanliness’, and (along with Bushy) on ‘Upkeep’ and Greenwich and St James’s score especially highly on ‘Peace & Quiet’.

– A high 13% spontaneously mention they would like Bushy Park to have more dog litter bins/for dog mess to be cleared up.

Summary of Findings (2 of 9)KPI PERFORMANCE RATINGS (IN-PARK VISITOR SURVEY) CONT’D

Ease of Getting Around & Access: All four Parks are rated highly (and equally) on these areas.

Information (Signposting & Maps, Information on Park Features): Greenwich and St James’s score relatively highly on Signposting and Information. Bushy and Green Park achieve only fair scores for these.

Visibility & Friendliness of Park Staff: Greenwich and St James’s received fair scores for these, but the scores for Bushy and Green are fair to poor.

– The fact that ‘visibility and friendliness of staff’ is rated lower at Bushy Park may be related to lower proportions of visitors rating the Park as ‘very safe’, compared to the other three Parks.

Catering (Number of Facilities, Quality of Facilities): Greenwich scores relatively highly on ‘number’ and ‘quality’. St James’s, Bushy and Green all received fair to poor ratings for ‘number’ and ‘quality’.

– With respect to Bushy Park, a high 13% spontaneously mentioned that they would like more/better catering facilities.

Toilets (Number of Toilets and Quality of Toilets): The ‘number of toilets’ is rated as fair in Greenwich and St James’s, but as poor in Green and especially Bushy Park.

– With respect to Bushy Park, a high 18% spontaneously mentioned that they would like more/better/cleaner toilets.

Summary of Findings (3 of 9)KPI PERFORMANCE RATINGS (IN-PARK VISITOR SURVEY) CONT’D

Facilities for Children: Greenwich and Bushy Park score well in this respect, but St James’s and Green are rated as fair.

Facilities for Adults: All four parks score well on this area.

Sports Facilities (Number and Quality): Greenwich receives good scores on these areas, Bushy receives fair scores, and St James’s and Green receive poor scores.

Seating: Greenwich scores highly on this aspect, while the scores for Bushy, St James’s and Green are satisfactory to good.

– With respect to Green Park, a high 11% spontaneously suggested ‘more seating’ as an improvement.

– The rating is significantly lower in Autumn in Green Park (after the deckchair service ends).

KPI IMPORTANCE RATINGS (IN-PARK VISITOR SURVEY)

Park Environment (Tidiness & Cleanliness, Upkeep and Peace & Quiet): ‘Tidiness and cleanliness’ and ‘upkeep of the park’ are rated as highly important and the most important areas in all 4 Parks.

– ‘Peace and quiet’ is slightly less important in the central parks St James’s and Green.

Ease of Getting Around & Access: These aspects are equally rated as very important for all Parks.

Summary of Findings (4 of 9)KPI IMPORTANCE RATINGS (IN-PARK VISITOR SURVEY) CONT’D

Toilets (Number of Toilets and Quality of Toilets): The ‘quality of toilets’ is rated as highly important in all four Parks.

– The ‘number of toilets’ is rated as highly important in Greenwich, and slightly less so in Bushy, St James’s and Green.

Visibility & Friendliness of Park Staff: This aspect is rated as very important for Greenwich, and fairly important for Bushy, St James’s and Green.

Information (Signposting & Maps, Information on Park Features): ‘Information on Features’ is rated very important for Greenwich and important for Bushy, St James’s and Green.

– ‘Signposting and Maps’ is considered slightly less important than ‘Information on Features’.

Seating: This is seen as highly important in Greenwich, St James’s and Green, and slightly less so in Bushy.

Catering (Number of Facilities, Quality of Facilities): The ‘quality’ is seen as more important than the ‘number’ across all four Parks. The quality is very important at Greenwich and quite important for Bushy, St James’s and Green.

Facilities for Children: These are important at Greenwich and Bushy, but less important for St James’s and Green.

Facilities for Adults: This aspect is quite important for Greenwich, but not very important for Bushy, St James’s and Green.

Sports Facilities (Number and Quality): These are quite important for Greenwich , but not very important for Bushy, St James’s and Green.

Summary of Findings (5 of 9)AWARENESS OF WHAT THERE IS TO DO IN THE PARKS AMONG NON-VISITORS (TELEPHONE

SURVEY)

Awareness (unprompted) of what there is to do among Non-Visitors is not very high.

– Being aware of what the Parks have to offer is the main factor that could motivate people to visit them (when prompted by a list): between 39% and 50% mention this for each of the Parks.

– Greenwich: 41% could not recall anything about the Park and only 22% mention ‘historical buildings’ and an 13% the observatory. None mentioned any of the sports on offer.

– Bushy: 47% could not recall anything about it. The children’s playground was the highest mention (25%).

– St James’s: 59% could not recall anything about it. Only catering facilities was mentioned by more than 10% (18%).

– Green: 70% could not recall anything about it. It is recalled mainly for its footpaths (8%).

KEY SUGGESTIONS FROM RESPONDENTS FOR IMPROVING THE PARKS

Parking at Greenwich: this was spontaneously mentioned by 10% in the In-Park Survey. 25% also named this as a reason for not visiting Greenwich (when prompted in the Non-Visitors Telephone Survey).

When prompted with a list, a high proportion of visitors would like to see Events or Activities in each of the four Parks (between 6 and 9 out of 10), especially at Greenwich (91%), less so at St James’s (60%) (in the In-Park Survey).

Summary of Findings (6 of 9)KEY SUGGESTIONS FROM RESPONDENTS FOR IMPROVING THE PARKS CONT’D

Consistent with the KPI ratings, more/better/cleaner toilets at Bushy are spontaneously mentioned by a high 18% (in the In-park Survey).

More seating at Bushy is spontaneously mentioned by 11% (in the In-Park Survey).

Improved Catering Facilities at Bushy are spontaneously mentioned by 8% (in the Visitors Telephone Survey).

Improved Safety. Whilst only a very small proportion rate the Parks as unsafe, a significant proportion (around 30%) rate the Parks as ‘quite safe’, as opposed to ‘very safe’ (in the Visitors Telephone Survey). Bushy is rated less safe than the other three. In the Non-Visitors Telephone Survey, a high 13% state they would not feel safe at Bushy.

EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES CURRENT VISITORS WOULD LIKE TO SEE (IN-PARK SURVEY)

A significant proportion of visitors at St James’s Park (40%) and at Green Park (24%), do not want to see any events or activities in the Park.

Music Events and Concerts are the most requested events overall, wanted by a high 48% of those interviewed at Greenwich and about 35% of those at Bushy and Green (36% and 35% respectively), but only 18% at St James’s.

(Open-air) Theatre Events are wanted by a high 41% for Greenwich, 31% for Bushy and 22% for Green (and only 11% for St James’s).

Wildlife Events are requested by a high 45% of those interviewed at Bushy (the most requested event for this Park) and 31% at Greenwich.

Children’s Events, Historical Events and Guided Walks/Talks are requested by around 25% of those in the Greenwich and Bushy surveys.

Summary of Findings (7 of 9)HOW NON-VISITORS COULD BE ENCOURAGED TO VISIT PARKS

Around 75% of those interviewed spontaneously named at least one reason that could motivate them to visit the Parks. Moreover, between a 32% (Green) and 52% (Bushy) say they are extremely or fairly likely to visit the Park in the next year.

– Events and Activities are the most frequently mentioned reason (spontaneously) overall that could motivate people to visit the Parks, named by between 9% (Bushy) and 19% (Green) of non-visitors. The highest specific (spontaneous) Events and Activities mentioned are:

– Bushy and Green: Catering Facilities (around 10%)

– Greenwich: Activities for Children (13%)

– Green, Greenwich and St James’s: Music events/concerts (around 8%)

When prompted with a list of ways of encouraging people to visit the Parks, many reasons receive high mentions:

– As previously mentioned, Knowing what there is to do in the Parks is the main mention (by between 39% and 50%) that could motivate people to visit the Parks.

– Parking is named as a key issue by between a 31% and 42%.

– If it were easier to get to/not so far is named by between 23% and 43% for each of the Parks.

– Improved toilets is mentioned by between 23% and 39% for each of the Parks.

– If I felt safe there is mentioned by between 19% and 26% (highest for Bushy).

Summary of Findings (8 of 9)EXTENT TO WHICH ROYAL PARKS IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE

Both visitors and non-visitors agree strongly overall that the Parks improve the quality of life in their areas and in London as a whole. Only between 5% (Bushy and Green) and 11% (Greenwich) of Non-visitors disagree.

DECISION TO VISIT PARKS

When Decide to Visit Parks: Visits to the Parks are largely made on the day of the visit (by around 75%).

The weather is an important factor for visits, especially for current non-visitors. It is less important for Greenwich and Bushy.

Main reasons for visiting Parks:

– For fresh air, a walk and peace and quiet are the main reasons (in the In-park survey) for visiting the Parks, named by between 22% and 48% for the Parks.

– Going with friends/family is mentioned by around 20% at both Greenwich and St James’s (in the Visitor Telephone Survey).

– Bushy: To bring the children, walk the dog and exercise are key reasons, named by about between 21% and 33% (in the In-park Survey).

– St James’s and Green: As part of sightseeing, on way to visitor attraction are named by between 10% and 20%.

– Green and St James’s: As a shortcut is named by 37% for Green and 20% for St James’s.

– St James’s: To see the wildlife is named by 17%.

Summary of Findings (9 of 9)

TIME AND LENGTH OF VISITS

Seasons Parks are Visited: Around 50% of visitors interviewed (in Visitor Telephone Survey) claim to visit the Parks all year round and between 31% (Bushy) and 51% (St James’s) visit in Summer.

Days, Times and Length of Visits

– Days: Bushy and Greenwich attract more visitors at weekends,while visits to St James’s and Green are more evenly spread across weekends and weekdays.

– Times: Most visits are made between 1pm and 6pm.

– Length of Visits: Stays are generally longer in Summer than Autumn. Visits to Green and St James’s are around 40 minutes to an hour. Visits to Greenwich and Bushy are around an hour and a half.

PROFILE OF VISITORS AND NON-VISITORS

Non-visitors of Bushy tend to be from a household with no children, which is consistent with the importance of visitors taking children there (especially for children’s playground).

Conclusions & Recommendations

Conclusions and Recommendations (1 of 3)PARK-WIDE PRIORITY AREAS

Park Environment (Tidiness & Cleanliness, Upkeep and Peace & Quiet) is of paramount importance, and therefore it is important that the emphasis on these aspects is continued in order to maintain the high satisfaction scores.

Toilets: Firstly, providing more toilets and improving condition of toilets is the highest priority for all four Parks. At Bushy and Greenwich, where length of visit is longest of all four Parks, this aspect emerges as particularly important.

Higher Quality Catering Facilities are, after toilets, the next highest priority in all four Parks, but particularly so in Bushy and, to a lesser extent at St James’s. An increase in the standard of catering facilities (and advertising them) would probably increase use and therefore represent an opportunity/need to provide more facilities/ greater capacity.

Increase Awareness of What There is to do in Parks: Given the low awareness of what the Parks have to offer amongst local (and presumably more distant) non-visitors, it seems clear that advertising the Park offerings could encourage current non-visitors, and frequency of visits.

– For Greenwich, the observatory and sports facilities could be advertised given low recall of these features;

– For Bushy, its ‘wildness’ and ‘wildlife’ features/events. Advertising any increase in safety in campaign would also be beneficial;

– For St James’s, advertising its proximity to key London attractions (Buckingham Palace), ‘Inn the Park’ and the wildlife;

– For Green, again the proximity to attractions, and ‘peace & quiet’ from a West End shopping trip, for example.

Conclusions and Recommendations (2 of 3)

PARK-WIDE PRIORITY AREAS CONT’D

Other Advertising Ideas:

– Exploiting the ‘Royal’ status of the Parks could be particularly attractive to overseas visitors;

– Given the very positive perception of the role of The Parks, advertising as ‘the lungs of London and for being tranquil/oases could be motivating.;

– The enjoyment of a fun, relaxed day outside with friends/ family;

Offering and Advertising (More) Activities and Events could stimulate non-visitors to visit and greater frequency of visiting.

– Music events, concerts and theatre, particularly in Greenwich, Bushy and Green;

– Wildlife events at Bushy and Greenwich;

– Children's events, historical events and guided walks & talks at Greenwich and Bushy;

– Community focussed events at the provincial Parks, such as firework displays and Easter Egg hunts;

– Health benefits of walking.

Increased Seating is an aspect that may result in higher visit satisfaction at all Parks, with the exception of Greenwich.

Conclusions and Recommendations (3 of 3)

PARK-WIDE PRIORITY AREAS CONT’D

Information on Park Features: These are priorities for improvement for Green and Greenwich, in particular. But we suggest improving these in all Parks to stimulate greater interest and repeat visits. We believe that providing information in key foreign languages (in the Central Parks) would also be important, as would a focus on the key places of interest within the vicinity of Parks.

Improving Safety, especially at Bushy, and advertising this could attract more visitors. Increasing the visibility of staff would probably be the best way of addressing this issue. CCTV could be another option.

PARK-SPECIFIC PRIORITY AREAS

Greenwich: Increasing Parking capacity, and developing different tiers of tariffs depending on day of week/ season.

Bushy Park: more dog litter bins and cleaning-up of dog mess on paths.

St James’s and Green: Shops/Merchandising. Given the high proportion of overseas visitors to these Parks, and the importance of the Royal Parks to life in/ a visit to London, there is potential for a shop selling Royal Parks merchandise. Information on Park features and associations would help to stimulate interest. We would suggest conducting further research on this aspect.

In-park Visitor Survey

Overall Rating of Parks

Overall Rating – Summer & Autumn Combined

67%

55%

65%

48% 46%

4%

6%

6%

5%

38%

28%

28%

1%

1%

1%

1%

Greenwich Total

Bushy Total

St James's Total

Green Total

Excellent Good Satisfactory Poor Very poor

Mean Scores

4.6

4.5

4.6

4.4

Base: All expressing an opinion at Greenwich (343), Bushy (330), St James’s (327); Green (342)

Overall satisfaction levels at all four Parks is very high

KPI Performance Ratings

Comparison of Parks on KPI Performance Ratings (1 of 2)

2

3

4

5

Tidiness andcleanliness

Upkeep of thepark

Peace and quiet Visibility andfriendliness of

park staff

Signposting andmaps

Information onpark features

Number ofcateringfacilities

Quality ofcateringfacilities

Greenwich Bushy St. James's Green

Park Environment Information & Staff Catering

Base: All respondents in Summer and Autumn surveys combined expressing an opinion: Greenwich (min: 157, max: 341), Bushy (min: 148, max: 332), St James’s (min: 60, max: 324), Green (min: 41, max: 339)

KPI Ratings – Summer and Autumn Combined (1 of 2)

2

3

4

5

Number oftoilets

Quality oftoilets

Facilities forchildren

Activities foradults

Number ofsports

facilities

Quality ofsports

facilities

Seating Ease ofaccess by

chosenmethod

Ease ofgetting around

the park


Other Facilities Ease of Getting AroundToilets


Comparison of Parks on KPI Performance Ratings (2 of 2)

KPI Performance Ratings: Greenwich Park (1 of 2)

54%

51%

40%

37%

37%

30%

22%

21%

51%

50%

57%

55%

49%

5%

6%

14%

11%

11%

11%

15%

21%

8%

8%

43%

44%

40%

2%

1%

2%

2%

1%

Upkeep of park

Tidiness & cleanliness

Peace & quiet

Ease of getting around

Ease of access

Seating

Children's facilities

Information on features


Base: All respondents in Summer and Autumn surveys combined expressing an opinion (min: 157, max: 341)

All aspects of Park Environment are rated very highly and highest of all aspects. Accessibility is also rated very highly.

KPI Performance Ratings: Greenwich Park (2 of 2)

18%

17%

16%

15%

15%

13%

10%

10%

8%

55%

44%

53%

48%

46%

37%

25%

21%

25%

22%

30%

31%

30%

31%

33%

3%

13%

7%

9%

3%

10%

11%

21%

2%

2%

52%

36%

58%

4%

10%

1%

2%

1%

1%Signposting & maps

Quality catering facilities

Visibility of staff

Number catering facilities

Adults activities

Quality of toilets

Quality of sports facilities

Number sports facilities

Number of toilets



Toilets and Sports Facilities are rated lowest of all, although these still achieve fair ratings. Visibility of staff receives a fair amount of criticism.

KPI Performance Ratings: Bushy Park (1 of 2)

41%

35%

35%

27%

25%

15%

13%

9%

54%

64%

49%

38%

22%

15%

10%

10%

14%

10%

25%

30%

25%

1%

2%

5%

1%

10%

18%

33%

1%

1%

43%

53%

54%

1%

10%

Peace & quiet

Ease of access

Upkeep of park




Adults activities

Visibility of staff



Peace & Quiet is particularly highly rated. Ease of access and park maintenance is also very highly rated. Visibility of staff receives substantial criticism.

KPI Performance Ratings: Bushy Park (2 of 2)

8%

8%

7%

6%

5%

5%

3%

40%

36%

30%

19%

25%

8%

37%

24%

35%

28%

24%

29%

37%

48%

21%

34%

14%

24%

29%

34%

35%

22%

52%

3%

4%

1%

2%

5%

2%

5%

4%

19%

1%

37%

43%

30%

14%Quality of toilets


Signposting & maps

Seating





Number of toilets



The Number of Toilets receives the most criticism by far. Catering Facilities, Sports and Information also attract significant negativity

KPI Performance Ratings: St James’s Park (1 of 2)

52%

32%

31%

31%

18%

18%

16%

15%

52%

55%

51%

58%

52%

4%

5%

9%

16%

24%

18%

23%

24%

1%

1%

2%

12%

3%

9%

44%

60%

62%

1%

1%

Upkeep of park

Ease of access



Peace & quiet

Seating

Signposting & maps




Upkeep is particularly highly rated. Accessibility and Tidiness are also highly rated.

KPI Performance Ratings: St James’s Park (2 of 2)

13%

12%

10%

9%

7%

7%

6%

5%

5%

39%

41%

31%

45%

17%

17%

22%

29%

41%

30%

28%

39%

34%

17%

16%

10%

14%

22%

22%

21%

15%

45%

47%

2%

1%

2%

2%

17%

16%

45%

35%

48%

18%Visibility of staff

Adults activities

Quality of toilets


Number of toilets







Sports Facilities attract most negative attention receives the most criticism by far. Quality of Catering and Number of Toilets are also criticised (but much less so)

KPI Performance Ratings: Green Park (1 of 2)

48%

38%

32%

26%

22%

13%

10%

9%

62%

56%

44%

52%

33%

4%

5%

11%

9%

19%

27%

30%

22%

1%

1%

2%

3%

15%

7%

32%

1%

1%

48%

56%

56%

1%

3%

Ease of access


Upkeep of park


Peace & quiet

Seating

Signposting & maps




Accessibility is particularly highly rated. All aspects of Park Environment also attract very good scores. Info on Park Features receives some criticism.

KPI Performance Ratings: Green Park (2 of 2)

9%

9%

7%

7% 29%

29%

20%

33%

34%

20%

27%

34%

33%

37%

22%

23%

33%

30%

21%

27%

24%

22%

22%

44%

18%

29%

40%

11%

7%

2%

5%

24%

9%

13%

5%

18%

4%

4%

3%

2%

1%

26%

34%

23%

27%Visibility of staff


Adults activities

Quality of toilets


Number of toilets






Number of Sports Facilities attract most negative attention, followed by Number of Toilets and Quality of Sports Facilities.

KPI Importance Ratings

Comparison of Parks on KPI Importance Ratings (1 of 2)

1

2

3

4

5

Tidiness andcleanliness

Upkeep of thepark

Peace and quiet Visibility andfriendliness of

park staff

Signposting andmaps

Information onpark features

Number ofcateringfacilities

Quality ofcateringfacilities

Greenwich Bushy St. James Green

Park Environment Information & Staff Catering


1

2

3

4

5

Number oftoilets

Quality oftoilets

Facilities forchildren

Activities foradults

Number ofsports

facilities

Quality ofsports

facilities

Seating Ease ofaccess by

chosenmethod

Ease ofgetting around

the park

Greenwich Bushy St. James Green

Other Facilities Ease of Getting AroundToilets


Comparison of Parks on KPI Importance Ratings (2 of 2)

KPI Importance Ratings: Greenwich Park (1 of 2)

28%

24%

23%

22%

19%

18%

18%

17%

53%

47%

51%

49%

60%

11%

13%

14%

18%

24%

21%

26%

21%

2%

5%

7%

5%

1%

3%

59%

58%

63% 1%

8%

1%

1%

2%

2%

2%

Upkeep of park


Quality of toilets

Peace & quiet

Visibility of staff

Seating

Number of toilets

Ease of access

Absolutely vital Very important Quite important Not particularly important Not at all important


xx%xx% HIGHEST RATED ASPECTS

LOWEST RATED ASPECTS

54%

51%

40%

8%

KPI Importance Ratings: Greenwich Park (2 of 2)

14%

14%

12%

12%

8%

7%

6%

6%

53%

45%

30%

40%

22%

28%

22%

21%

19%

27%

20%

29%

34%

33%

32%

9%

7%

6%

17%

18%

17%

23%

25%

9%

3%

10%

16%

4%

16%

11%5%

47%

58%

60% 3%

2%

1%Ease of getting around




Signposting & maps




Adults activities



10%

10%



KPI Importance Ratings: Bushy Park (1 of 2)

26%

23%

21%

19%

14%

13%

11%

10%

60%

38%

56%

52%

40%

17%

27%

15%

12%

29%

27%

32%

25%

5%

1%

6%

14%

3%

5%

15%

4%

5%

1%

9%

44%

62%

56% 1%

1%

1%

Upkeep of park

Peace & quiet


Quality of toilets

Number of toilets

Ease of access





35%

41%

35%

1%

0%



KPI Importance Ratings: Bushy Park (2 of 2)

3%

2%

1%

1%

1%

22%

38%

15%

18%

9%

8%

25%

35%

39%

34%

35%

35%

21%

23%

24%

23%

17%

29%

20%

34%

28%

35%

48%

7%

4%

3%

11%

4%

15%

32%

32%

19%

5%

5%

8%

10%

30%

36%

36% 22%Children's facilities

Seating


Signposting & maps

Visibility of staff




Adults activities



3%



KPI Importance Ratings: St James’s Park (1 of 2)

21%

19%

12%

10%

9%

7%

6%

5%

54%

46%

52%

36%

41%

21%

29%

43%

31%

38%

39%

46%

52%

1%

16%

5%

4%

3%

9%

2%

3%

51%

28%

57% 1%

3%

Upkeep of park


Peace & quiet

Seating

Quality of toilets

Ease of access

Number of toilets




52%

32%

31%

31%



KPI Importance Ratings: St James’s Park (2 of 2)

1%

37%

22%

18%

5%

43%

48%

45%

35%

36%

25%

47%

12%

12%

17%

20%

18%

25%

46%

25%

33%

35%

6%

4%

10%

7%

15%

22%

8%

49%

51%

1%

4%

4%

3%

3%

2%

1%

5%

4%

1%

21%

21%

27%

25%Signposting & maps


Visibility of staff



Adults activities






6%

5%

5%



KPI Importance Ratings: Green Park (1 of 2)

28%

23%

11%

8%

7%

7%

53%

50%

32%

55%

31%

19%

18%

25%

32%

32%

39%

37%

44%

2%

5%

6%

9%

13%

4%

17%

7%

1%

2%

9%

3%4%

4%

57%

52%

53% 1%Upkeep of park


Quality of toilets

Peace & quiet

Seating

Signposting & maps

Ease of access




32%

48%



KPI Importance Ratings: Green Park (2 of 2)

3%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

21%

15%

8%

23%

47%

33%

43%

24%

8%

16%

9%

26%

16%

2%

27%

18%

30%

38%

30%

42%

20%

8%

8%

42%

54%

36%

53%

24%

3%

8%

9%

7%

27%

63%

34% 21%

1%

Quality of catering facilities facilities

Number of toilets


Visibility of staff


Quality sports facilities

Adults activities





38%

3%

1%

2%



Strategy Matrices

Explanation of Strategy Matrices

Strategy matrices are an effective way of identifying how KPI areas may be addressed, given both their importance and performance.

The matrices plot importance (as stated by respondents) versus performance (satisfaction rated by respondents).

The four quadrants of the matrix show which aspects of the Parks’ offerings could potentially:

- be improved (Key Action Areas – top left)

- be maintained (Maintain – top right)

- be considered lower priorities (Lower Priorities – bottom left)

- be considered for reallocation of resources (Consider Reallocation of Resources – bottom right)

Strategy Matrix – Greenwich Park

Quality of sports

Number of sports

Activities for Adults

Access

Information features

Upkeep of Park



Seating

Tidiness & Cleanliness

Catering quality

Number of catering

Peace & Quiet

Quality of toilets

Number of toilets

Signposting and maps

Staff friendliness & visibility

Performance Rating

Imp

ort

ance

Rat

ing

Key Action Areas Maintain

Consider Reallocation of

ResourcesLower Priorities

Strategy Matrix – Bushy Park


Signposting and maps

Number of toilets

Quality of toiletsPeace & Quiet

Number of catering

Catering quality


Seating Children's facilities


Upkeep of Park


Access

Adult activities

Number of sports

Quality of sports

Performance Rating

Imp

ort

an

ce

Ra

tin

g



ResourcesLower Priorities

Strategy Matrix – St James’s Park

Staff friendliness & visibility Signposting and

maps

Number of toilets

Quality of toilets

Peace & Quiet

Number of catering

Quality of catering


Seating



Upkeep of Park


Access

Adult activities

Number of sports

Quality of sports

Performance Rating

Imp

ort

an

ce

Ra

tin

g


Lower Priorities


Resources

Strategy Matrix – Green Park

Quality of sportsNumber of sports

Adult activities

Access


Upkeep of Park



Seating


Catering quality

Number of catering

Peace & Quiet

Quality of toilets

Number of toilets Signposting and maps


Performance Rating

Imp

ort

an

ce

Ra

tin

g


Consider Reallocation

of Resources

Lower Priorities

Suggestions For Improvement

Suggested Improvements To Parks (Unprompted)Greenwich(Base: 344)

Bushy(Base: 332)

St James’s(Base: 327)

Green(Base: 344)

More / cheaper parking 10% - - -

More / better / cleaner toilets 6% 18% 3% 3%

Improve catering facilities 4% 13% - 3%

Cheaper restaurant / café facilities 4% - - -

Restrict cars / bikes driving through park

3% - - -

More staff 3% 6% - -

More dog litter bins / clean up dog mess

- 13% - -

More seating - 7% 6% 11%

More children’s facilities - 6% - -

More control over dogs / dog areas - 4% - -

Better / more signage of points of interest

- 4% - 3%

Generally clean up / clear rubbish - 3% - -

More events e.g. music - - 3% 5%

More / better flower beds

Fine/ good as it is

-

10%

-

8%

1%

9%

3%

11%Mentions over 3%

Educational or Cultural Events and Activities Would Like to See (Prompted with List)

48%

41%

31%

26% 25% 24%

19% 19%17%

14%

9%

45%

28%

17%

6%

40%

34%

22%

16% 17%

7%

20%

16%15%

31%

28%

36%

14% 14%

2%

5%8%

18%

11%9% 9% 9% 9%

6%

9%

24%

8% 8%

3%

Musicevents/concerts

(Open air)theatre

Wildlife events Children'sevents

Historical events

Guided walks/talks

Gardening/horticultural

Storytelling Educational Sports NONE


Base: Greenwich (344), Bushy (332), St James’s (327), Green (344). Top mentions only

Decision to Visit Parks

Main Reasons for Visiting Park (Unprompted) – Summer and Autumn Combined

Greenwich(Base: 344)

Bushy(Base: 332)


Green(Base: 344)

For fresh air 48% 39% 31% 22%

Walk / stroll 48% 31% 20% 28%

Peace and quiet 26% 26% 43% 28%

Bring the children 17% 27% 7% -

Walk the dog 16% 33% 1% 1%

Exercise (not sports) 12% 21% 3% 4%

Part of day’s sightseeing 11% 1% 15% 20%

Picnic/lunch/refreshment 10% 8% 14% 5%

Shortcut 9% 1% 20% 37%

See plants / flowers 7% 2% 10% 3%

On way to visitor attraction 5% 1% 12% 17%

See the wildlife 5% 9% 17% 1%

Running 4% 4% - 1%

Feed the wildlife 4% 5% 3% -

Cycling 3% 5% - -

Sightseeing in park 3% 1% 6% 2%

Meet friends / family - 3% 1% 1%

Fishing - 5% - -

Main Reasons for Visiting Park (Unprompted) – Summer and Autumn Combined


Bushy(Base: 332)


Green(Base: 344)

For fresh air 48% 39% 31% 22%

Walk / stroll 48% 31% 20% 28%

Peace and quiet 26% 26% 43% 28%

Bring the children 17% 27% 7% -

Walk the dog 16% 33% 1% 1%

Exercise (not sports) 12% 21% 3% 4%

Part of day’s sightseeing 11% 1% 15% 20%

Picnic/lunch/refreshment 10% 8% 14% 5%

Shortcut 9% 1% 20% 37%

See plants / flowers 7% 2% 10% 3%

On way to visitor attraction 5% 1% 12% 17%

See the wildlife 5% 9% 17% 1%

Running 4% 4% - 1%

Feed the wildlife 4% 5% 3% -

Cycling 3% 5% - -

Sightseeing in park 3% 1% 6% 2%

Meet friends / family - 3% 1% 1%

Fishing - 5% - -

65%

17%

6%

6%

4%

2%

71%

13%

7%

4%

3%

1%

72%

13%

6%

4%

2%

3%

72%

17%

6%

1%

1%

2%

Today

Yesterday

A few days ago

A week ago

A few weeks ago

A few months ago

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green

Base: Greenwich (344), Bushy (332), St James’s (327), Green (344)

When Decision was Made to Visit Park – Summer and Autumn Combined

0%

0%

The majority of visits are decided on the day and this decision appears relatively unrelated to the activities undertaken in the Parks

Average Length of Visit by Season

Greenwich Park

Summer: 1 hour 40 minutes

Autumn: 1 hour 24 minutes

Green Park

Summer: 43 minutes

Autumn: 36 minutes

Bushy Park


Autumn: 1 hour 30 minutes

St James’s Park


Autumn: 48 minutes

Base: Summer: Base: Greenwich (197), Bushy (205), St James’s (189), Green (198). Autumn: Greenwich (147), Bushy (127), St James’s (138), Green (146)

Visitor Profile (In-park Survey)

6%

47%

46%

5%

43%

51%

13%

46%

40%

22%

56%

23%

16-24

25-44

45+

Greenwich Bushy St James's Green


Age

51%

49%

48%

52%

43%

57%

55%

45%

Male

Female

Gender

83%

4%

3%

1%

8%

92%

3%

1%

5%

61%

17%

8%

5%

8%

43%

27%

13%

4%

12%

White

European

Americas

Australasian

Other

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green


Ethnic Origin Social Grade

32%

31%

15%

22%

45%

28%

15%

12%

45%

31%

10%

13%

40%

41%

12%

5%

48%

35%

8%

7%

AB

C1

C2

DE

London Average(2002)

66%

24%

1%

4%

4%

61%

36%

2%

1%

1%

1%

30%

12%

6%

13%

38%

2%

32%

10%

3%

6%

49%

1%

London

South East

South West

OtherEngland

Outside UK

Other

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green


Place of Residence

0%

44%

25%

12%

7%

4%

2%

5%

41%

24%

5%

7%

11%

4%

5%

5%

1%

Western Europe

North America

Oceania

Eastern Europe

Asia

Africa

South America

Other

St James's

Green

Base: All from outside UK - St James’s (123), Green (169)

Region of Residence (Overseas Visitors Only)

Group Composition

53%

17%

46%

15%

40%

11%

49%

5%

15%

46%

6%

38%

3%

3%

8%

3%

8%

9%

2%

72%

65%

83%

92%2%

6%

40%

40%

1%

3%

3%

1%

1%2%

4%

2%

1%

1%

3%

Greenwich Adults 16+

Greenwich Children

Bushy Adults 16+

Bushy Children

St James's Adults 16+

St James's Children

Green Adults 16+

Green Children

One Two Three Four Five+ None


Visitor Telephone Survey

Visiting Parks/ Other Places of Interest in London

Enjoyment of Visiting Parks/ Other Places of Interest in London

82%

74%

62%

31%

72%

66%

55%

51%

43%

31%

59%

19%

24%

29%

37%

32%

28%

3%

6%

2%

2%

6%

4%

5%

15%

4%

8%

6%

18%

19%

26%

33%

18%

1%

2%

1%

6%

7%

7%

Greenwich Park

Bushy Park

St James's Park

Green Park

Kew Gardens

Natural History Museum

Tate Modern

Hyde Park

Tower of London

Madame Tussaud's

Very enjoyable Fairly enjoyable Not particularly enjoyable Not at all enjoyable Don't know

Base: Greenwich (101), Bushy (101), St. James (100), Green (100)

All Users:

Base: All users visiting Hyde Park (375), Kew (332), TofL (316), NHM (354), Tate (291), Tussaud’s (280)

Enjoyment of the two provincial Parks is higher than for the two central Parks. Except for Green Park, the parks are enjoyed by the park visitors at least as much as the other places of interest except Kew Gardens.

Frequency of Visiting Parks/ Other Places of Interest in London

19%

25%

10%

13%

18%

1%

1%

17%

14%

4%

3%

1%

41%

38%

69%

70%

62%

65%

68%

83%

79%

77%

7%

27%

30%

12%

17%

21%

6%

1%

38%

21%

41%Greenwich Park

Bushy Park

St James's Park

Green Park

Hyde Park

Tate Modern

Madame Tussaud's

Natural History Museum

Kew Gardens

Tower of London

Once a week + 1 - 3 times/month Less often than 1/ month Never

Base: All users (402)


All Users:

The two provincial Parks are more frequently visited than the two central Parks.

Seasons Parks are Visited

51%

18%

43%

13%

2%

61%

14%

31%

10%

6%

41%

24%

51%

13%

4%

47%

22%

44%

9%

1%

All year around

Spring

Summer

Autumn

Winter

Greenwich

Bushy

St. James's

Green


Around half of users claim to visit ‘their’ park all year around (although more so for Bushy Park). Between a third and half visit in summer.

Day & Time Parks Are Visited

74%

62%

26%

8%

2%

64%

55%

21%

6%

4%

68%

39%

42%

8%

4%

61%

34%

43%

13%

7%

Between 9am and6pm

Weekend

Weekday

After 6pm

Before 9am

Greenwich

Bushy

St. James's

Green


The two provincial Parks attract more users at weekends. However, St James’s and Green Park visits are more evenly spread across weekdays and weekends, but more likely to be visited in the afternoon on weekends

Reasons for Visiting and Ways ofEncouraging Visits

Reasons for Visiting Parks (Unprompted)Greenwich(Base: 101)

Bushy(Base: 101)


Green(Base: 100)

For a walk 32% 49% 31% 31%

Went with friends/family 21% 1% 18% 11%

Bring the children 17% 16% 5% 5%

Part of sightseeing 17% 3% 2% 2%

As a shortcut 13% 7% 25% 28%

Recreation/pleasure 7% 9% 8% 5%

Walk the dog 7% 10% 2% 1%

For the gardens/plants 6% 12% 3% 3%

Children’s playground 6% 10% 1% -

Picnic 5% 5% 4% 4%

Fresh air 5% 8% 8% 4%

Good weather 5% 1% 1% 4%

Used café/catering 5% 1% 8% 6%

Local/convenient 4% 1% - 1%

Like the park 4% 2% 8% 1%

Cycling 3% 16% 2% 4%

Relaxation 3% 2% 5% 5%

Exercise 3% 5% 2% 3%

How Could Encourage Visitors to Visit Park More Often (Unprompted)


Bushy(Base: 101)


Green(Base: 100)

NOTHING 50% 50% 49% 39%

Better/cheaper parking 9% 3% 2% -

Events/activities 7% 4% 6% 11%

If I had more spare time 6% 7% 6% 3%

Better transport links 4% 1% 1% 2%

Good/better weather 4% 3% 5% 4%

Better health/mobility 3% 2% 1% 1%

More/better catering 3% 8% 5% 8%

More sport facilities 3% 1% 1% 1%

More/better lighting 2% - 1% 1%

Longer/later opening hours 2% 1% - -

Children’s playground 2% 3% 3% 3%

More info/advertising 2% - - -

More/better toilet facilities 2% 1% - 1%

More better gardens/plants 1% 4% 1% 5%

Ban on dogs/no dog mess - 3% - -

If I lived closer - 1% 6% 7%

Rating of How Parks Improve Quality of Life, Safety Rating, Influence of Weather and Mode of Transport

Extent ‘Park’ Improves Quality of Life In The Area

88%

88%

82%

81%

94%

11%

5%

2%

2%

5%

11%

14%

10%

1%

3%

1%Greenwich Park

Bushy Park

St James's Park

Green Park

Agree strongly Agree slightly Neither Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

Base: All Excluding Don’t know: Greenwich (101), Bushy (101), St. James (97), Green (99)

Mean Scores

4.9

4.9

4.8

4.7

Very high agreement across all four Parks that they improve the quality of life in the area, and especially for the two provincial Parks. There is universal agreement that the nine Royal Parks improve life in London

Extent 9 Royal Parks Improve Quality of Life in London

Base: All excluding Don’t know across all 4 surveys (397)

100% agreement

65%

30%

3%

57%

39%

4%

71%

27%

65%

30%

5%

Very safe

Quite safe

Not very / at allsafe

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green

Perceptions of Safety

All four Parks are considered to be safe places, although Bushy Park could possibly benefit from improvements in this area


26%

40%

22%

13%

21%

47%

20%

12%

36%

39%

17%

7%

42%

28%

10%

18%

A great deal

Quite a lot

Not very much

Not at all

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green

Extent to Which Weather Influenced Decision To Visit

Weather is an important factor for all Parks, especially the two Central Parks


Means of Transport to Park

50%

36%

26%

7%

6%

4%

3%

2%

72%

20%

8%

2%

30%

1%

13%

30%

49%

6%

13%

38%

6%

12%

32%

39%

2%

12%

32%

1%

Car

None/walk

Local bus

Train

Bicycle

DLR

Underground

Taxi/minicab

Other

Greenwich

Bushy

St. James

Green


0%

0%

0%0%

0%

0%0%

The car is the main means of transport to the provincial Parks, whilst users predominantly take the bus to both Central Parks

Visitor Profile (Telephone Survey)

2%

46%

51%

2%

35%

62%

3%

45%

49%

6%

49%

45%

18-24

25-44

45+


Age

39%

61%

44%

56%

46%

54%

48%

52%

Male

Female

Gender


80%

7%

1%

9%

90%

4%

2%

3%

71%

15%

1%

12%

68%

12%

3%

1%

12%

White

European

Americas

Australasian

Other

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green



32%

31%

15%

22%

28%

41%

14%

14%

31%

44%

10%

12%

25%

57%

6%

8%

39%

37%

9%

12%

AB

C1

C2

DE

London Average (2002)

0%0%

32%

29%

16%

15%

6%

17%

32%

17%

25%

9%

31%

39%

12%

10%

8%

45%

26%

13%

11%

5%

One

Two

Three

Four

Five +

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green


Household Composition Age of Children in Household

67%

14%

15%

15%

6%

51%

18%

19%

20%

12%

68%

12%

10%

14%

6%

69%

18%

7%

2%

5%

None

0 - 5

6 - 10

11 - 15

16 - 17

Base: All with 2 or more people per household: Greenwich (66), Bushy (83), St James’s (69), Green (55)

Non-Visitor Telephone Survey

Likelihood of Visiting, Reasons for not Visiting and Ways of Encouraging Visits

Likelihood of Visiting Parks in The Next 12 Months

18%

13%

11%

7% 23%

30%

27%

33%

30%

18%

24%

5%

3%

6%

5%

27%

26%

39%

36%

20%Greenwich Park

Bushy Park

St James's Park

Green Park

Extremely likely Fairly likely Not very likely Extremely unlikely Don't know


Over half of those interviewed about Bushy Park claimed they are at least fairly likely to visit it. Around two fifths claim to visit Greenwich and St James’s. The lowest proportion is for Green Park with a third.

Mean Scores

2.5

2.5

2.3

2.0

Reasons for Not Recently/ Never Visiting (Prompted)Greenwich(Base: 150)

Bushy(Base: 150)


Green(Base: 151)

I am too busy 61% 45% 42% 11%

No reason to visit it 39% 45% 47% 55%

Difficult to park 25% 13% 27% 19%

Difficult to get to 22% 15% 25% 23%

Prefer other parks etc. 21% 42% 56% 50%

Don’t know what’s there 18% 22% 21% 34%

It’s too far 15% 19% 35% 33%

Doesn’t cater for older children

11% 9% 6% 5%

Too much traffic through it 10% 13% 11% 8%

Park is too busy 10% 4% 5% 9%

Don’t like parks generally 9% 3% 3% 7%

Isn’t well set-up for visitors 7% 9% 5% 7%

Doesn’t cater for younger children

5% 3% 7% 5%

It’s too big 3% 1% 1% 2%

Wouldn’t feel safe there

None of the above

3%

7%

13%

10%

4%

9%

1%

11%

How People Could be Encouraged to Visit the Parks (Unprompted)

15%

14%

9%

8%

4%

3%

3%

25%

9%

9%

7%

6%

6%

1%

8%

23%

9%

12%

4%

3%

6%

4%

5%

27%

4%

19%

3%

6%

5%

2%

26%

If had more time

If held events/activitiesetc

If went with other people

Better parking facilities

More information

If attraction to visit e.g.museum

Good/better weather

Nothing

Greenwich

Bushy

St. James's

Green


How People Could be Encouraged to Visit Parks (Prompted With a List)


Bushy(Base: 150)


Green(Base: 151)

Easier to park 39% 31% 42% 32%

If knew what was there 39% 45% 40% 50%

If toilets are improved 39% 36% 29% 23%

If better set-up for visitors 32% 32% 23% 27%

If easier to get to 31% 26% 41% 35%

If weren't so far 25% 23% 43% 38%

Cater for young children 24% 17% 17% 21%

Less traffic through park 23% 19% 27% 19%

Cater for older children 21% 16% 19% 19%

If I felt safe there 20% 26% 19% 19%

If footpaths were better 17% 21% 15% 12%

If not so busy

None of the above

15%

23%

10%

20%

11%

15%

11%

21%

Park Activities and Facilities, Rating of How Parks Improve Quality of Life and Influence of Weather

Awareness of Activities, Places of Interest, Services and Facilities Offered at Parks


Bushy(Base: 150)


Green(Base: 151)

Historical buildings 22% 6% 4% 3%

Catering/refreshments 19% 8% 18% 6%

Wildlife 16% 17% 9% 2%

Flowers 16% 15% 8% 4%

Observatory 13% - - -

Children’s playground 13% 25% 5% 3%

Feeding ducks 10% 9% 9% 6%

Info on historic/wildlife 9% 4% 3% 1%

Picnic areas 7% 7% 5% 6%

Footpaths 7% 9% 6% 8%

Model boating 7% 5% 1% 1%

Concerts

Deck chairs

Good views/scenery

Fishing

Lake/pond

Cycle paths

NONE/ DON’T KNOW

4%

4%

4%

1%

3%

1%

41%

1%

1%

1%

9%

6%

5%

47%

5%

4%

1%

2%

3%

1%

59%

3%

5%

1%

1%

2%

1%

70%

Activities, Services & Facilities Would Like To See (Unprompted)

13%

8%

5%

2%

65%

6%

5%

12%

4%

66%

8%

7%

5%

3%

70%

8%

9%

11%

3%

60%

Activities etc for children

Events/music/concerts

Catering facilities etc

Toilet facilities

None/Don't know

Greenwich

Bushy

St. James

Green

Base: Greenwich (150), Bushy (150), St James’s (150), Green (151). Top mentions only

Agreement With Statement – ‘improves the quality of life in this area’

63%

67%

67%

70% 20%

5%

2%

7%

5%

1%

6%

27%

19%

20%

3%

5%

4%1%

7%

2%

Greenwich Park

Bushy Park

St James's Park

Green Park

Agree strongly Agree slightly Neither agree nor disagree Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

Base: All except who don’t like going to parks: Greenwich (115), Bushy (129), St. James (118), Green (103) – excludes don’t knows

Extent to Which Weather Influences Decision To Visit

49%

45%

46%

44% 29%

11%

11%

12%

16%

11%

8%

32%

32%

32%

9%

4%Greenwich Park

Bushy Park

St James's Park

Green Park

A great deal Quite a lot Doesn't very much Doesn't at all

Base: All except those who don’t like going to parks: Greenwich (136), Bushy (146), St James’s (145), Green (141)

Non-Visitor Profile (Telephone Survey)

5%

29%

64%

5%

33%

59%

7%

43%

47%

6%

40%

52%

16-24

25-44

45+


Age

38%

62%

37%

63%

44%

56%

38%

62%

Male

Female

Gender


72%

2%

1%

23%

84%

8%

9%

66%

13%

1%

21%

70%

11%

1%

17%

White

European

Americas

Other

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green


32%

31%

15%

22%

11%

33%

12%

38%

25%

39%

15%

17%

22%

46%

6%

22%

26%

40%

7%

22%

AB

C1

C2

DE

London Average (2002)


0%

31%

29%

19%

12%

7%

23%

31%

19%

17%

8%

41%

26%

14%

13%

6%

30%

34%

18%

11%

7%

One

Two

Three

Four

Five +

Greenwich

Bushy

St James's

Green

Household Composition Age of Children in Household

62%

15%

17%

18%

10%

70%

7%

11%

18%

10%

57%

20%

19%

19%

7%

68%

20%

9%

10%

4%

None

0-5

6-10

11-15

16-17

Base: Greenwich (150), Bushy (150), St James’s (150), Green (151) Base: All with at least 2 people in household: Greenwich (101), Bushy (112), St James’s (88), Green (104)

Documents

The Royal Parks 2004 Research Report: 1) In-park Visitor Survey 2) Visitor Telephone Survey 3) Non-Visitor Telephone Survey Greenwich Park, Bushy Park,