PLANNING & ASSESSMENT REPORT
Table 5: Inhibitor list with scoring allocation
Annexure VIII has the Inhibitor matrix scoring. The segments requiring a low level of effort to retrofit as pedestrian infrastructure received a low scoring and are shown as green segments on the map (See Figure 55). Conversely, the segments requiring a high level of effort to retrofit as pedestrian infrastructure received a high scoring and are shown as red segments on the map. It is worth noting that this mapping exercise doesn't consider each inhibitor's intensity; for instance, if a segment had five garbage spots and given the understanding that garbage spots are easy to fix, then the segment will receive a scoring of 1. This approach will get an overarching picture of how fixable or non-fixable the issues are along the routes without getting into the weightage of each issue. Map on the left shows the inhibitor scoring across the network and map on the right shows potential routes for pilot derived from traffic analysis from earlier chapter. On comparing both the maps it can be seen that out of the available walking network, conservancy lanes, 6 th main, 5th main, 7th cross are most favourable for walking as they score the least on inhibitor scoring. 18th cross, 16th cross, 15th cross should be considered as a second step for upgradation from the entire network.
Figure 55: (Left) Map showing scoring of inhibitors across the walking network in Malleswaram, (Right) Map showing possible pilot routes from network and traffic analysis. Prepared by Sensing Local
61
