Shared space but not shared surfaces

[Martin Cassini]

Blind people usually welcome the idea of shared space, but not shared surfaces (where kerbs are removed and there is no defined pavement). FiT Roads believes that mutual tolerance will flourish and vulnerable users be safer on roads free of standard priority and traffic lights, but until the desired behaviour shift (considerate filter-in-turn) has been shown to survive the possible Hawthorne effect (novelty wearing off, might assuming right), it is easy to understand why blind people want identifiable safe zones. How such zones are defined and designed remains open, but they must be achievable. If we can't solve what has been called the biggest intellectual challenge - how to make blind road-users feel safe - we might as well pack up and go home. If we can make streets safe for blind people and children, they will be safe for everyone. It has to be a design that fosters conduct based on context, compassion and commonsense (not coercion).

[Ian Perry]

http://velomondial.blogspot.com/2009/02/shared-space-gaining-momentum.html

[Martin Cassini]

As a traffic engineer friend wrote: "Only a few authorities have been willing to experiment with the potential for failure linked to a pedestrian accident - an accident that might just as easily have happened under formal control anyway. There is no way to tell absolutely without detailed monitoring and use of control sites." As you know, we're pursuing a trial to monitor these things long term. Meanwhile, it's likely that any accidents are likely to be magnified by the "opposition". In Drachten they found that any collisions were minor, because speeds were much lower. - The fact that accidents, although rare and minor, do still occur in shared space streets, especially those with shared surfaces, suggests that design isn't the whole answer. Indeed I've always held that what is needed first is a change in culture. We need to get away from the bad idea of main road and directional priority, so that people can follow social instincts of first-come, first-served give-and-take. Design is important, but secondary to the perception shift.

[Ian Perry]

I was speaking with someone from a University who has done some research on home zones and looked at shares space too, and they were unaware of any actual accidents... I think that a 3 year old boy was hit by a cyclish in Newbury and has been held up to show that the streets there are not safe... However it is also likely that an accident would also have occurred had there been a kerb...

Thinking back to 2000, an area of Bristol known as "The Centre" did have a number of accidents as people were stepping out into the path of buses as the pavement and road had been constructed of the same material and people were confused. Modification had to be made so that the bus lane was more distinguishable from the pedestrian area. I do believe that there was a kerb from memory, so a kerb does not ensure safety.

It may be worth one of us trying to find out more about this...

[Martin Cassini]

Thanks for the first-hand account and info, Ian. Your point about the benefits of shared surfaces outweighing the pitfalls is well made. It's possible that the only thing blind people need fear is fear itself, and if they step off the cliff, as in the Apollinaire poem, they will fly. But meanwhile, their concerns are valid and need addressing. Newbury, in being closed to normal traffic from 10.00-18.00 (or similar), is like other shared space streets in England, e.g. New Road in Brighton, which has no entry for vehicles at one end. Of course, Ashford is on a bigger scale, though as far as I know, is still a link road, with 40% of its usual traffic constructively diverted. Intelligent re-assignment is partly what the Ashford scheme is about. My particular interest is to see how things work in a heavily-trafficked network which is stripped of standard controls but allowed to stay busy.

[Ian Perry]

I visited Newbury today to see for myself if it is dangerous. The shared surface is only in the centre and clearly marked by a flat kerb for those of us with good vision, but perhaps confusing for those who do not and guide dogs. Most pedestrians were walking on what remains exclusively and area for pedestrians on each side of the shared space, however I felt quite safe and comfortable wandering down the middle.

There is ample bicycle parking along the street which is used. I also witnessed people of all ages cycling on the shared surface (mostly on bicycles made for off road tracks up mountains in this rather flat town).

Buses, police vehicles, taxis, workmen's vans, bicycles and mobility scooters used the shared surface at little more than a walking pace and although the street was busy, the few vehicles did not interfere with the pedestrians. When the user of the mobility scooter was ready to enter a shop, the user moved from the shared surface to the pedestrian area unobstructed by a raised kerb. Thus the mobility scooter was in minimal conflict with other street users.

In Newbury, the places for vans to park is clearly defined, so the pedestrian walkway is not obstructed. The campaign against the streets in Newbury as elsewhere does seem to be being led by people who have not visited the streets, and although they may confuse some, many more gain so much more from safer, quieter more attractive streets, with out the physical barrier of kerbs, parked vehicles and traffic.

From what I saw, the scheme is a success and very similar to what has been achieved elsewhere with great success such as in Freiburg.

A larger scheme was introduced late last year in Ashford. A lot is resting on its success - at least in the UK.
http://www.ashford.gov.uk/transport_and_streets/road_improvements/shared_space_dvd.aspx


Here are a few links to the objectors:
http://www.guidedogs.org.uk/index.php?id=12&tx_ttnews[pointer]=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=1601&tx_ttnews[backPid]=22&cHash=4573f9bdbe
http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/living/motoring-section/surface-tension
http://www.simply-inclusive.co.uk/pdf/1127_CampaignReport.pdf



Are there figures anywhere of accidents caused by people falling over/down kerbs?