Living Car Free - Shared Space, Removing Traffic Signs and Road Rules

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5290564n

One thing they didn't mention was that in Drachten, the congestion rates went down as well.

I would like to see what happens if they try this in N.A. in the States particularly, they seem to want to put in definite rules, but as soon as they are established, everyone wants to find the loopholes. How close can I cut that amber? Do I have to actually *stop*? And do I have to stop *On* the line? That kind of thing.

My own experience in Calgary is that drivers are much less co-operative, even when it would be in their interest. I would like to see if this idea can make people back off just that fraction which would permit co-operation.

I love 2/3s of the way through how the guy is facing backwards talking to the camera, not looking at the road, talking about what drivers have to look for.

I'm a big fan of shared space programs.

As he said in the opening, it's an issue of trusting your fellow man.

I don't, except to expect my fellow man to do the most rude, thoughtless, stupid thing imaginable in front of me; that way, I can only be pleasantly surprised.

It doesn't happen often.

This is the next big thing in designing streets for mixed mode transit--making cars, buses, bikes, and peds all happy on the same street. It was first created by Hans Monderman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman

This is the next big thing in designing streets for mixed mode transit--making cars, buses, bikes, and peds all happy on the same street. It was first created by Hans Monderman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman




The shared space philosophy distinguishes between the fine-meshed slow network, and the larger-meshed fast network. The slow network, which is the subject of the shared space treatment, is characterised as the street network which make public space vital and accessible. On the slow network motor traffic is welcomed as a guest, but has to adapt to certain social norms of behaviour. The layout of the road must make this clear. The fast or supra traffic network, which allows traffic to reach destinations quickly, and which is designed using traditional traffic engineering methodologies, is essential if the slow network is to function properly.



Interesting, but I noted some objection from Dutch cyclists:



The November 2007 issue of the Fietsersbond (Dutch Cyclists Union) newsletter [25] criticises shared space schemes as encouraging the bullying of cyclists by motorists, giving examples of people who feel less safe as a result.

Monderman has stated that these objections are more a matter of communication than design, stressing the importance of consulting such people during the design stage.

As he said in the opening, it's an issue of trusting your fellow man.

I don't, except to expect my fellow man to do the most rude, thoughtless, stupid thing imaginable in front of me; that way, I can only be pleasantly surprised.

It doesn't happen often.

I think he's wrong to say it's about trust. In fact, in some ways, there is less trust needed in a monderman-type street than in a traditional street.

The principle is to make roads ambiguous by removing signs and markings, even removing curbs and other delineations that ordinarily separate different kinds of users. In conditions of ambiguity, everyone is forced to scan the total environment and actually think about the best way to proceed--to get to where you want to go without hitting anything or anybody. Everybody is forced to pay attention, and sometimes even to slow down a bit (although it is not the intention to greatly slow down travel).

Probably ought to compare the hit and run statistics between Dutch drivers and US drivers...Over there you hit a pedestrian or cyclist you are pretty much liable regardless of who was at fault. In the US it seems they fine you a few hundred bucks and send you on your way.

Aaron:)