Shared space

Shared space is an urban design approach that minimises the segregation between modes of road user. This is done by removing features such as kerbs, road surface markings, traffic signs, and traffic lights. Hans Monderman and others have suggested that, by creating a greater sense of uncertainty and making it unclear who has priority, drivers will reduce their speed, in turn reducing the dominance of vehicles, reducing road casualty rates, and improving safety for other road users.

Pedestrians and cars on Exhibition Road in London

Shared space design can take many different forms depending on the level of demarcation and segregation between different transportation modes. Variations of shared space are often used in urban settings, especially those that have been made nearly car-free ("autoluwe"), and as part of living streets within residential areas. As a separate concept, "shared space" normally applies to semi-open spaces on busier roads, and here it is controversial.

Shared space is opposed in particular by organisations representing the interests of blind, partially sighted and deaf people, who often express a preference for the clear separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic.

History

The origin of term is generally linked with the work of Dutch traffic engineer Hans Monderman, who pioneered the method in the Dutch province of Friesland.[1] Prior to the adoption of the term, street design projects carried out in Chambéry, France, by Michel Deronzier from the 1980s used the term "pedestrian priority". The term was used by Tim Pharoah to describe informal street layouts with no traffic demarcation (for example "Traffic Calming Guidelines", Devon County Council, 1991).

The term has been widely applied, especially by Ben Hamilton-Baillie, since the preparation of a European co-operation project in 2003.[2] The European Shared Space project (part of the Interreg IIIB-North Sea programme) developed new policies and methods for the design of public spaces with streets between 2004 and 2008 under the leadership of Hans Monderman until his death in 2008.[3]

A review of the evolution of the shared space concepts (2014) is offered in Transport Reviews: A Transnational Transdisciplinary Journal.[4]

The Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation has identified three broad types of street design approach that have been called shared space but which have a number of important differences. They suggest that the term "shared space" should be replaced by three new labels: pedestrian prioritised streets, informal streets and enhanced streets.[5]

Philosophy and support
A shared space scheme in New Road, Brighton, United Kingdom

The goal of shared space is to improve the road safety and vibrancy of roads and junctions, particularly ones with high levels of pedestrian traffic, by encouraging negotiation of priority in shared areas between different road users.[1][6] Shared space is a "design approach rather than a design type characterised by standard features".[7]

Hans Monderman suggested that an individual's behavior in traffic is more positively affected by the built environment of the public space than by conventional traffic control devices and regulations.[2][8][9] A reason for the apparent paradox that reduced regulation leads to safer roads may be found by studying the risk compensation effect.[9]

  • "We're losing our capacity for socially responsible behaviour...The greater the number of prescriptions, the more people's sense of personal responsibility dwindles." (Der Spiegel quotes Monderman)[10]
  • "When you don't exactly know who has right of way, you tend to seek eye contact with other road users. You automatically reduce your speed, you have contact with other people and you take greater care."[11]

Such schemes are claimed to have had positive effect on road safety, traffic volume, economic vitality, and community cohesion where a user's behaviour becomes influenced and controlled by natural human interactions rather than by artificial regulation.[3] Monderman has stated that objections are more a matter of communication than design, stressing the importance of consulting all relevant groups during the design stage.[12]

The UK's Department for Transport issued national guidance on shared space in 2011.[6] However in July 2018 it reversed its position and instructed local authorities to halt all new shared space projects, with Transport Minister Nusrat Ghani stating they "just don't work" for blind and partially-sighted people.[13]

Criticism

Reviewing the research that underpinned national policy in the UK,[6] Moody and Melia (2011) found that some of the claims made for shared space schemes were not justified by the evidence—particularly the claims that pedestrians are able to follow desire lines, and that shared space reduces traffic speeds.[1] Their primary research in Ashford, Kent, suggested that in streets with high volumes of traffic, pedestrians are more likely to give way to vehicles than vice versa. Most people, but particularly women and older people, found the shared space intimidating and preferred the previous layout with conventional crossings. A study by Hammond and Musselwhite[14] using a case study of Widemarsh Street in Hereford found that if traffic volume was relatively low and speeds of vehicles slow anyway then vulnerable road users found it easier to share the area with vehicles, including those blind or partially sighted and older people with mobility impairments.

There are wide-ranging reservations about the practicality of the shared space philosophy. In a 2006 report from the Associated Press, it was commented that traditionalists in town planning departments say the schemes rob the motorists of vital information, and reported that a spokesman for Royal National Institute of Blind People criticised the removal of familiar features such as railings, kerbs, and barriers.[15] Shared space is opposed by many organisations representing blind, partially sighted and deaf people. Some of their members avoid shared space areas entirely. Shared surfaces, which are generally used in shared space schemes, can cause concern for the blind and partially sighted who cannot visually negotiate their way with other road users, as the lack of separation implicit in these features has also removed their safe space.[16] The UK's Guide Dogs for the Blind Associations "Say No to Shared Streets" campaign has the support of more than thirty other disability organisations.[17] There have been similar concerns raised by other groups representing disabled people, including Leonard Cheshire Disability, the Royal National Institute for Deaf People, and Mencap, who have noted problems when negotiating a route with motor vehicle users, leading them to challenge its fundamental premise.[18] Lord Holmes' 2015 report Accidents by Design found that sixty-three per cent of respondents reported a negative experience of shared space, and thirty-five per cent said they actively avoided it. Lord Holmes attacked the concept as a recipe for "confusion, chaos and catastrophe".[19]. The Holmes report also noted serious issues for wheelchair users "Respondents who used wheelchairs stated that it was virtually impossible to locate a safe crossing point on roads with shared space."[20] In July 2018, the UK DfT reversed its position on shared spaces due to the risk to disabled people, with Transport Minister Nusrat Ghani stating "they just don't work".[21]

The Dutch Fietsberaad (Centre of Expertise on Bicycle Policy) has demonstrated ambivalence over shared space schemes, describing some benefits but also some drawbacks for the less assertive cyclist.[22] Fietsberaad has noted that shared space has decreased car speeds but that "some cyclists do not dare take priority. Instead, they dismount and wait for priority to be clearly given, then walk or ride across the intersection. A problem may be that they are met halfway by cars from the other direction and must rely on the drivers to give way of their own volition. Owing to low speeds and the cyclists' defensive behaviour this crossing strategy need not be unsafe in itself, but it most certainly is not convenient."

In New Zealand, concerns about such limitations of the shared space concept have led, in cooperation with disability organisations, to the introduction of vehicle- and obstruction-free corridors ("accessible zones") along the building lines (i.e., in the areas where footpaths would normally be located), to provide a safe route in the shared spaces being introduced.[23]

Nearly car free

The British Transport Research Laboratory found that below flows of 90 vehicles per hour adult pedestrians were prepared to mingle with traffic. When flows reached 110 vehicles per hour, they used the width between frontages as if it were a traditional road.[24] A similar value is used to define suitability for a woonerf.[25]

Examples
Many streets in Tokyo are shared, though not as a result of outright policy.

Numerous towns and cities around the world have implemented schemes with elements based on the shared space principles.

Australia
See also: Shared Zone

Bendigo, Victoria, plans (as of October 2007) to implement shared space in its city centre.[26]

Austria

In October 2011, Graz opened a shared space zone around a five-point intersection known as Sonnenfelsplatz next to the University of Graz with the intention of easing congestion from 4 separate city bus lines and auto, bike and pedestrian traffic as well as reducing the number of accidents. This was the first shared space concept for Austria.[27]

Denmark

Ejby introduced a shared space project in Denmark. It was part of the European Interreg IIIB project with Province of Fyslän as lead partner. The project was led by urban planner Morten Mejsen Westergaard and Bjarne Winterberg. It was supervised by Hans Monderman.[28]

Germany

Bohmte introduced a shared space road system in September 2007. One of project's goals was to improve road safety in the town.[29]

Netherlands
See also: Woonerf

Makkinga has no road markings and no signs giving an order or direction signs visible in the streets. There is a traffic sign at the entrance to the town that reads Verkeersbordvrij, meaning "free of traffic signs". Parking meters and stopping restrictions are also absent.[10] Drachten is another pioneer town for such schemes. Accident figures at one junction where traffic lights were removed have dropped from thirty-six in the four years prior to the introduction of the scheme to two in the two years following it. Only three of the original fifteen sets of traffic lights remain. Tailbacks (traffic jams) are now almost unheard of at the town's main junction, which handles about 22,000 cars a day.[30] An evaluation of the Laweiplein scheme in Drachten, which replaced a set of traffic lights with an open square with a roundabout and pedestrian crossings, concluded that traffic now flows at a constant rate, at equal speeds for motor and bicycle traffic, and more freely with reduced congestion, shorter delays and improved capacity including for pedestrians.[31] There has been a reduction in recorded accidents, but public perceptions of traffic safety have slightly declined, which is in accordance with theories of how shared spaces work by creating uncertainty.

New Zealand
See also: Shared Zone
Auckland, New Zealand responded to disability groups' concerns by ensuring that a strip of "accessible zone" would be retained in the design. This strip is made off limits to vehicles by strategically placed street furniture, while the building edge and paving strips provide guidance to vision-impaired people.[23]

Several of Auckland's streets have been turned into shared spaces.[32][33] These include Elliot and Darby Streets,[34] Lorne street, the Fort street areas, all near Queen Street, Auckland and Federal Street by the Skytower. However, Auckland's first shared space is Wairepo Swamp Walk,[35] completed mid-2010. Wairepo Swamp Walk is one of a number of transport infrastructure projects improving transport services around Eden Park as part of the 2011 Rugby World Cup. A research study has been undertaken by Auckland Transport in conjunction with the University of Auckland to evaluate city centre shared spaces in the Auckland CBD.[36][37][38][39]

Sweden

Since the zebra crossings and traffic signs were replaced with a spacious fountain, benches, and other street furniture, the Skvallertorget square in Norrköping has experienced no accidents, mean traffic speeds have dropped from 21 to 16 km/h (13 to 10 mph) and livability has increased.[40]

Switzerland

The concept of a shared space where no right of way is defined for all participants is presently not legally possible. The Strassenverkehrsgesetz (SVG) requires that at least one of the participants has a right of way. As a result, the Swiss concept of Begegnungszone has become popular. However here pedestrians have right of way.[41]

United Kingdom
See also: Home zone
Exhibition Road, London, "shared space"
A shared space scheme in Giles Circus, Ipswich (England)

In London, Exhibition Road was developed into a shared space in 2012 after a design competition in 2003, a court case, and numerous community consultations.[42]

In Seven Dials, London, the road surface has been re-laid to remove the distinction between the roadway and the footway and kerbs have been lowered to encourage people to wander across the street.[43] A scheme implemented in London's Kensington High Street, dubbed naked streets in the press – reflecting the removal of markings, signage and pedestrian barriers – has yielded significant and sustained reductions in injuries to pedestrians. It is reported that, based on two years of 'before and after' monitoring, casualties fell from 71 in the period before the street was remodelled to 40 afterwards – a drop of 43%.[44]

Gwynedd Council rebuilt the foreground to Caernarfon Castle. The scheme uses local slate and granite surfacing and high-quality street furniture, and a new fountain, intended to create a change in the behaviour of drivers.

Brighton City Council transformed the whole of New Road, adjacent to the Royal Pavilion, into a fully shared space designed by Landscape Projects and Gehl Architects, with no delineation of the carriageway except for subtle changes in materials. The route for vehicles along New Road is only suggested through the location of street furniture, such as public seating and street lights. The re-opening of the street has led to a 93% reduction in motor vehicle trips (12,000 fewer per day) and lower speeds (to around 10 MPH), alongside an increase in cyclist and pedestrian usage (93% and 162%, respectively).[45][46]

In spring 2008, shared space was introduced in Ashford, Kent. The scheme replaced a section of Ashford's former four-lane ring road with two-way streets on which drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians have equal priority. Unnecessary street furniture, road markings and traffic lights have been removed and the speed limit cut to 20 mph.[47] The scheme has been claimed to have improved safety records. Between November 2008 and January 2011, there have been four road casualties there, resulting from the six reported accidents.[48] Claims about the success of the Ashford scheme were called into question during 2011 by a study conducted by the University of the West of England.[1]

Following the initial reports claiming a success for the Ashford scheme, other UK local councils planned to use a similar approach; these include Southend-on-Sea, Staines, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Hereford, and Edinburgh.[49]

There have also been trials in Ipswich, with shared space being a key feature of the design of the new Ravenswood community being built on the site of the former Ipswich Airport.[50]

At Princess Royal Square (formerly Pier Square) in Weston-super-Mare, the conventional road system has been replaced by a seafront open area. This has been complemented by the restoration of the Coalbrookdale fountain in its centre.

In Poynton, Cheshire, it was found that as well as providing significant safety improvements, and regenerating the retail and social centre, the road capacity was not reduced after the redevelopment of a busy junction in the town incorporated shared space elements. In the scheme, the redevelopment of a multi-lane signalised crossroads, with a traffic flow of 26,000 vehicles per day, which was completed in March 2012, traffic lanes, signals, road markings, road signs and street clutter were all removed. In the first three years after the redevelopment there was one minor personal injury accident, compared to 4-7 serious incidents in each of the three years leading up to the project. Although no speed limit changes were made, average traffic speeds fell to around 20 mph and there were reductions in vehicle journey times as well as reductions in pedestrian delays at the junction.[51]

A pilot road layout project, which includes shared-space elements, is to be trialled in the Stobhill area of Morpeth, Northumberland. Opposition groups argue that the plans are unsafe for children and disabled people.[52]

United States
See also: Complete streets

In the United States, the shared space concept has become more popular in recent years.

In West Palm Beach, Florida, removal of traffic signals and road markings brought pedestrians into much closer contact with cars. The result has been slower traffic, fewer accidents, and shorter trip times.[53]

In Savannah, Georgia, the Oglethorpe Plan has been adapted to accommodate pedestrian and vehicular traffic throughout a network of wards, each with a central square. The size and configuration of the squares restrains vehicular traffic to speeds under 20 miles per hour, a threshold speed beyond which shared space tends to break down.[54]

In Salt Lake City, Utah the City Creek Center property was designed with a curbless street and bollards. Following the success of this, the publicly owned side of Regent Street was redone to be curbless as well.[55]

Shared streets have also been installed in the New York City neighborhoods of Jamaica, and Flatiron.[56] In the Financial District, there are plans to remove curbs in areas that have been closed off to vehicular traffic since the 9/11 attacks.[57]

In 2018, the Philadelphia region's Metropolitan Planning Organization DVRPC published a guide for engineers and policymakers Curbless Streets: Evaluating Curbless and Shared Space Concepts for Use on City of Philadelphia Streets.[58] The US Federal Highway Administration has also issued a publication, Accessible Shared Streets: Notable Practices and Considerations for Accommodating Pedestrians with Vision Disabilities.[59]

gollark: And modern routers and stuff are often hilariously insecure. There are botnets of them.
gollark: You can also get approximate location from an IP.
gollark: In summary, such messages are wrong and bad (probably originally a joke or some way to harass a user) and don't send them or try and ping 8000 people about them.
gollark: How would it help if discord already knows, even?
gollark: Ridiculous accusations of hacking?

See also

General themes

Proponents

References
  1. Moody, S. & Melia, S., (2011) Shared space - implications of recent research for transport policy. Project Report. University of the West of England, retrieved 22 February 2013
  2. Ben Hamilton-Baillie. "What is Shared Space?" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 December 2010. Retrieved 16 October 2008.
  3. "Shared Space". Shared Space Institute. Archived from the original on 31 January 2010. Retrieved 31 October 2009. Booklets published by the EU partnership.
  4. Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2014) (2014). "A Review of the Evolution of Shared (Street) Space Concept in Urban Environments, Transport Reviews, 34(2), 190-220". Transport Reviews. 34 (2): 190–220. doi:10.1080/01441647.2014.893038.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  5. Creating better streets: Inclusive and accessible places. Reviewing shared space. Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation. January 2018. http://www.ciht.org.uk/download.cfm/docid/BF28B40D-9855-46D6-B8C19E22B64AA066 accessed 4 February 2018
  6. Department for Transport, UK (October 2011), Local Transport Note 1/11 (PDF), The Stationery Office
  7. MVA Consultancy (October 2010). "Designing the Future: Shared Space: Operational Research. Department for Transport" (PDF). Retrieved 8 March 2015.
  8. Damian Arnold (15 November 2007). "UK traffic engineers lack skills for shared-space". New Civil Engineer. Retrieved 1 February 2008.
  9. "Shared Space: Room for Everyone: A New Vision for Public Spaces". Shared Space (A European co-operation project). June 2005.
  10. Matthias Schulz (16 November 2006). "European Cities Do Away with Traffic Signs". Spiegel Online. Retrieved 17 January 2007.
  11. "European Towns Remove Traffic Signs to Make Streets Safer". Deutsche Welle. 27 August 2006. Retrieved 17 January 2007.
  12. Hamilton Baillie website. "Shared Space - the alternative approach to calming traffic" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 September 2012. Retrieved 1 October 2008.
  13. "'Shared-space' road schemes put on hold". BBC News. 27 July 2018.
  14. Hammond, V. and Musselwhite, C B A (2013). The attitudes, perceptions and concerns of pedestrians and vulnerable road users to shared space: a case study from the UK. Journal of Urban Design 18(1), H 78-97.
  15. "In Europe, less is more when it comes to road signs". International Herald Tribune. Associated Press. 21 November 2006. Retrieved 16 October 2008.
  16. Guide Dogs for the Blind Association. "What's the Problem". Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  17. "'Shared street' problem for blind". BBC. 20 May 2009. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  18. Guide Dogs for the Blind Association. "Shared Surfaces Campaign Report - "Stop shared surfaces, keep our pavements"" (PDF). Retrieved 27 September 2008.
  19. "Accidents by Design: The Holmes Report into Shared Space - Lord Holmes of Richmond MBE". Lord Holmes of Richmond MBE. July 2015. Retrieved 17 October 2015.
  20. "New report calls for a moratorium on shared space schemes › Transport for all › Accessible Transport in London".
  21. "'Shared-space' road schemes put on hold". BBC News. 27 July 2018.
  22. Shared-space-intersection De Kaden
  23. "Elliot Street - Accessibility". Auckland City Council. Archived from the original on 18 November 2010. Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  24. A review of simplified streetscape schemes. Allan Quimby, James Castle. PPR 292. TRL Ltd, January 2006. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/review-of-simplified-streetscape-schemes.pdf accessed 16 November 2015
  25. Creating better streets: Inclusive and accessible places. Reviewing shared space. Page 12. Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation. January 2018. http://www.ciht.org.uk/download.cfm/docid/BF28B40D-9855-46D6-B8C19E22B64AA066 accessed 18 May 2018
  26. "Walkers first on naked streets". The Sydney Morning Herald. 18 October 2007.
  27. Heike Falk (September 2012). "Shared Space Implementation Sonnenfelsplatz in Graz, Austria". Eltis. Retrieved 19 March 2014.
  28. Mejsenwiki (December 2014). "Shared Space Implementation Denmark". MMW. Retrieved 15 December 2014.
  29. Catherine Bosley (11 September 2007). "Town ditches traffic lights to cut accidents". Reuters. Retrieved 14 September 2007.
  30. David Millward (4 November 2006). "Is this the end of the road for traffic lights?". The Daily Telegraph. London. Retrieved 15 March 2015.
  31. The Laweiplein, Evaluation of the reconstruction into a square with roundabout (PDF) (Report). Noordelijke Hogeschool Leeuwarden NHL. January 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 5 September 2012.
  32. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 20 September 2009. Retrieved 2009-08-30.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  33. Auckland City Council Archived 20 November 2009 at the Wayback Machine
  34. Auckland City Council Archived 20 September 2009 at the Wayback Machine
  35. City Scene, Auckland City Council Archived 26 March 2011 at the Wayback Machine
  36. Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2013a) (14 December 2017). "Analysis of Pedestrian Performance in Shared Space Environment". Archived from the original on 11 May 2014.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  37. Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2013b) (June 2013). "Evaluating Shared Spaces: Methodological Framework and Performance Index". Road & Transport Research: A Journal of Australian and New Zealand Research and Practice. 22 (2): 52.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  38. Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2014) (30 November 2013). "Safety Performance Study of a Shared Pedestrian and Vehicle Space in New Zealand". Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board (2464).CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  39. Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Tse, M. (2011). "Shared space performance evaluation: Quantitative analysis of pre-implementation data" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 August 2012. Retrieved 8 April 2012.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  40. "No accidents after road conversion in Norrköpping" (PDF). Shared Space. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 April 2008.
  41. "SR 741.01 Strassenverkehrsgesetz vom 19. Dezember 1958 (SVG)".
  42. Rowan Moore: Exhibition Road, London – review, in The Guardian, 29 January 2012
  43. Ben Webster (22 January 2007). "'Naked' Streets Are Safer, Say Tories: Traffic Lights and Signs Could Vanish Accidents Will Fall, Study Claims". London: The Times.
  44. Gould, Mark (12 April 2006). "Life on the open road". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 23 May 2010.
  45. "New Road City Centre Shared Space, Brighton (December 2007)". Scheme of the Month: January 2008. Cycling England. December 2007. Archived from the original on 2 July 2007.
  46. "New street designs are leaving blind people with the prospect of teaching their guide dogs new tricks". NCE magazine. 31 December 2007. Retrieved 25 January 2008.
  47. "Ringing the Changes: The Ashford Ring Road Project Kent County Council". Royal Town Planning Institute. 27 January 2010. Retrieved 27 January 2011.
  48. "Just six accidents since Shared Space". Kent Online. KM Group. 20 January 2011. Retrieved 27 January 2011.
  49. "Winning streak continues for Ashford shared space scheme". Grontmij. 5 October 2009. Retrieved 27 January 2011.
  50. "Planning Application 05/00285/REM, Planning Layout" (PDF). 18 February 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 4 March 2007.
  51. "Poynton Town Centre: streetscape and place-making project". Institution of Civil Engineers. Retrieved 8 March 2015.
  52. Coulson, Andrew (29 September 2016). "Request for streetscape meeting turned down". Morpeth Herald. Johnston Publishing. Retrieved 1 October 2016.
  53. McNichol, Tom (December 2004). "Roads Gone Wild". Wired (12.12). Retrieved 26 April 2006.
  54. Wilson, Thomas D. The Oglethorpe Plan. University of Virginia Press, 2012. chapter 5.
  55. Nelson, Bob. "Salt Lake City Announces Regent Street Makeover Plans". www.kuer.org. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
  56. "Flatiron Shared Street CB 5 Transportation Committee" (PDF). New York City Department of Transportation. 27 March 2017. Retrieved 14 May 2017.
  57. Walker, Ameena (14 May 2018). "Tourist-heavy Wall Street could get pedestrian-friendly improvements". Curbed NY. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
  58. Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (January 2018). "Curbless Streets: Evaluating Curbless and Shared Space Concepts for Use on Philadelphia's Streets" (PDF). DVRPC.
  59. "Accessible Shared Streets - Publications - Bicycle and Pedestrian Program - Environment - FHWA". www.fhwa.dot.gov. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.