In the second in our series on driving schemes, we look at roads where pedestrians have vehicles share the same space. Could it work in your town?
What's the big idea?
Shared Space is a concept pioneered by the Dutch traffic management expert Hans Monderman (now deceased). Monderman's idea was that the excess of visual stimuli that drivers have to contend with was hindering, not helping, safe driving. Without all the signage telling you what to do where, drivers have to read the road ahead and become more responsive.
Shared Space was first trialled in the Dutch village of Makkingen in 1998. A larger scheme was installed in the town of Drachten in 2003. Traffic lights and signage were removed. A major junction, which once had lights on each exit, and pedestrian crossings over each branch, was cleared of all its markings. And pavements were lowered to the same level as the road surface. Drivers entering the junction must negotiate with one another, and pedestrians, in order to clear the junction.
Surprisingly the scheme has been an almost unqualified success. Drachten now has a better traffic flow, and accidents have fallen from eight per year to a statistical zero.
The success of the Drachten scheme has led to similar developments elsewhere in the world, including Australia and Germany.
In Britain the first small-scale Shared Space scheme opened in Brighton in 2007. New Road is a popular entertainment destination lined with bars and theatres, opposite the city's historic Royal Pavilion.
Brighton and Hove City Council resurfaced the entire street (pavement and roadway) with block paving, so that pedestrians and vehicles were on the same level. Only a slight gradation of stone, and the position of street furniture, gives a visual clue as to where pavement ends and street begins.
The Brighton scheme has resulted in significantly lower volumes of motorised traffic (93 per cent down), travelling at lower speeds - an average 10 mph - and a corresponding rise in cycle traffic (a 93 per cent increase). Pedestrian traffic has increased by 162 per cent.
Similar schemes have also been introduced in central London (Kensington High Street and Seven Dials, Covent Garden) and a more comprehensive scheme is being built in Ravenswood near Ipswich.
Arguments for
Better traffic flow. The removal of traffic lights allows traffic to flow more freely. That means less pollution and shorter journey times. It also saves councils money on the maintenance of expensive traffic control systems.
Reduced accidents. When cars approach junctions, they do so at lower speeds. Drivers, disorientated by the lack of signage, have to concentrate more carefully on the roads. Better concentration equals better safety.
Aesthetics. City centres have become cluttered with ugly signs, red routes, yellow lines, pedestrian crossings and traffic light pillars. Shared Space removes most of these unnecessary visual distractions, allowing for pleasant landscaping. In Drachten, for instance, the roundabout has been replaced with decorative fountains.
Not nannying. Drivers are sick and tired of taxes, regulations and signs telling them what to do. Shared Space is an antidote to the nanny state approach to driving. It recognises drivers' intelligence and allows them, not the traffic lights, to make the decision of when to enter the junction.
Arguments against
Stealth pedestrianisation. Brighton cabbies will tell you that increased pedestrian use on New Road is nothing to do with the Shared Space concept. They argue that most private drivers don't realise that they can drive down the road, because it looks so much like a pedestrian zone. Certainly taxis and commercial vehicles greatly outnumber private cars.
Disabled pedestrians. Groups campaigning on behalf of the deaf, blind and other pedestrians with disabilities have criticised shared space schemes. Assistance dogs are trained to recognise raised kerbs and barriers. Pelican crossings are easily identifiable to blind people because of bumps in the paved surface. Removing these visual and tactile aids are a step backwards in provision for people with disabilities.
Idiots. Shared Space schemes rely on the intelligence and goodwill of the law-abiding majority. But there is no compensating for idiots. There is a small percentage of drivers who view the absence of signage as an invitation to drive as recklessly as they like.
Increased familiarity. Critics argue that Shared Space schemes only work because of their novelty. Drivers used to familiar signage are caught unawares and have to use their wits. But if Shared Space schemes became the norm, drivers would get used to them and pay less attention.
Related links
Smart idea? Have your say...
Is Shared Space common sense, or a recipe for disaster? Would you feel safe crossing the road in Drachten? As a driver, have you encountered Shared Space schemes? Share your thoughts with us below.
More motoring schemes and ideas
The only way to find out if it will work is to try it.
Report abuse
Why do the British find it impossible to adapt? We mostly refuse to learn another language and think that if we shout loud enough non-English speaking folk will understand us. We refuse to accept new ideas, because of 'tradition'. But, what is traditional in this clapped out country any more? Mostly, tradition can be expressed as 'More Expense'. We ought to realise we are no longer a 'world-power', and swallow our pride when a good, but foreign idea comes along. If it seems to be worth adopting , let's adopt it. If it proves to be useless, s@#$% it. I don't live in Swindon, but they have a junction called 'The Magic Roundabout'. It's confusing if you don't know it, but it took me only two annual visits to get adequately familiar with the way it works. And it works a treat as far as I can see. It would work wonders at Scott Arms in the West Midlands, the busiest junction in Europe (So I am told). Will we get a junction like that in Brum? I doubt it. The traffic-lights it would replace are a good source of revenue, and they also give weight to the claims of 'Congestion' because they cause congestion. A good island system would mean less money for the Council.
Report abuse
I have never heard of such stupid idea, has anyone looked at the amount of traffic here compared to Holland, probably the smallest town here has more traffic that the larger towns in Holland. Lets hope that common sense prevails and signs etc remain in place they provide stability and order for both pedestrians and traffic.
Report abuse
This would be a great scheme except for the presence of delivery van drivers, mobile phone users (drivers and pedestrians), boy racers, taxis, buses (Boston had a great idea of running buses through a pedestrian precinct with hazard lights on and a warning beeper sounding all the time) and finally because I haven't got all night, drivers taught by the Bung us Some Money (work it out for yourself) driving school. As the old saying goes familiarity breeds contempt. As for councils wanting to spend money on street furniture, road markings and signage, those times have long gone and most councils are looking for ways of cost cutting, if not, ask your local councillor why not? They are answerable to you the electorate.
Report abuse
Comment on this article
Please login to post a comment. Log In
Not already a Yahoo! User? Sign up to get a free Yahoo! Account