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
Most small towns no longer have retail premises left, thanks to out of town retail parks. Nobody is driving or walking in the town centre. Why bother?
Report abuse
From my experience Pedestrian Zones do NOT work. Mainly because the Police do not enforce them. I have witnessed people using them as short cuts to drop off friends, NOT deliveries, because they are too lazy to get off their Fat Arses and walk the 100m or so. Streets approaching the Zone should be blocked off at the Entrance, with bollards that can be dropped, allowing access in the cases below These were designated as areas where you could walk in Safety, and free of car fumes. The only justifiable causes are Emergency Vehicles. Let's get rid of the filth who drive through like idiots, without a care for anyone else.
Report abuse
I'm amazed! I lived in Brighton and cycled along this road every day for over a year and in all that time I simply assumed I was cycling illegally through a pedestrianised zone that only Taxi's and delivery vehicles were allowed to access. For once cab drivers have it spot on, the only reason the figures are what they are and this scheme can be called a success is because no-one knew anything about it! Rather than a pioneering road traffic management scheme, it's actually quite a brilliant example of how inept local councils can be sometimes.
Report abuse
The promoters of such schemes must be ignoring the dangers. While working in Rijen, The Netherlands, I had occasion to experience what can happen when pedestrians and motor vehicles share the same path. When walking back to my hotel many evenings, I would seen someone on a motor scooter without lights, racing along the path on the other side of the road. I knew cycles were allowed on pavements so just thought it was some reckless kid. Unfortunately, one evening when I was walking home, something hit my heel and I fell over. I felt quite stunned but apart from a very sore heel, I was unhurt. Later, the police told me that the motor scooter rider said he had shouted but that I didn't get out of the way, so he threw his motor scooter over to avoid me. Pedestrians and motor vehicles in the same space may work as long as drivers take exceptional care and there are plenty of witnesses around. But God help pedestrians when reckless drivers take risks or believe it is the responsibility of pedestrians to anticipate a driver's stupidity. Without witnesses, drivers will take chances and pedestrians are more likely to suffer.
Report abuse
This was just another typical looney Brighton Town Council idea (it never has or will deserve the 'City' title). When the road cited was pedestrianised it seemed that for once they had got something right (apart from putting a long row of seats under the trees where our million poulation of pigeons roost)!. But in no time cars (and taxis in particular) were allowed back and pedestrians don't know if they are coming or going. No doubt it was pressure from the taxi drivers whose mafia runs this town. Brighton has the worst traffic conjestion of ant town including London and is the only town of any size not to have a park and ride.
Report abuse
will_nuck, the fact that you not only didn't know the rules of the road, but admit that you intended to cycle illegally, is the sort of attitude which gives all us cyclists a bad name. Can you wear a jester hat next time you're out cycling, so cabbies and bus drivers know which idiot to cull?
Report abuse
I live it Brighton. It's a pants idea. Make the road pedestrian only. The only reason no one has been hit by a car so far is the novelty factor. Once people get used to it the whole system will collapse and the council will spend millions putting it back to how it was. One can only imagine what visually impaired people make of it... or those in wheelchairs. You only have to think about it for three seconds and you can see all the things wrong with it - thinking that pedestrians and cars can live together in peaceful harmony is naive at best...
Report abuse
As A visually impaired person with a guide dog who is trained to find steps (curbs) and stop, shared surfaces are a no go area. They are a very BAD idea! I should be able in moderen society to; like every one else walk down a street and not be concerned I will be walking into a path of a car or van. I use curbs as an identification of where I am; so that when my dog stops at a curb, I know to turn right, left or straight on to my destination. With shared surfaces I do not get that info, and drivers think that I should move out of their way. (Yes I have been shouted and honked at) I say no to shared surfaces!
Report abuse
I think it is alright for small villages where speed should be reduced anyways, and where traffic is small. But for bigger towns you will either get huge traffic jams inside the town or huge traffic jams on the roads going around the town...
Report abuse
cant wait for the m6 to be shared with pedestrians! john manchester
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