World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Shared space


Shared space

New look of the Exhibition Road, Kensington, London

Shared space is an urban design approach which seeks to minimize the segregation of pedestrians and vehicles. This is done by removing features such as curbs, road surface markings, traffic signs, and traffic lights. Variations of shared space are often used in urban settings, especially those that have been made nearly car-free.

Shared space design can take many different forms depending on the level of demarcation and segregation between different transportation modes. It has been suggested that, by creating a greater sense of uncertainty and making it unclear who has priority, drivers will reduce their speed. This is conducive to a safer environment for both pedestrians and vehicles. Shared space schemes are often motivated by a desire to reduce the dominance of vehicles, vehicle speeds, and road casualty rates.

Shared space is opposed by organizations representing the interests of blind, partially sighted and deaf people, who often express a preference for the clear separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. However, some research has shown that shared space design accommodates the disabled better than conventional highway design.[1]


  • History 1
  • Philosophy and support 2
  • Potential concerns 3
  • Examples 4
    • Australia 4.1
    • Austria 4.2
    • Denmark 4.3
    • Germany 4.4
    • Netherlands 4.5
    • New Zealand 4.6
    • Sweden 4.7
    • Switzerland 4.8
    • United Kingdom 4.9
    • United States 4.10
  • See also 5
  • References 6
  • External links 7


The origin of term is generally linked with the work of the late Dutch traffic engineer Hans Monderman, who pioneered the method in the Dutch province of Friesland.[2] 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 Pharaoh 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.[3] 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.[4]

A review of the evolution of the shared space concepts (2014) is offered in Transport Reviews: A Transnational Transdisciplinary Journal.[5]

Philosophy and support

A shared space scheme in New Road, Brighton (England)

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.[2][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.[3][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.[4] 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]

Potential concerns

Reviewing the research which underpinned national policy in the UK,[6] Moody and Melia (2011).[2] 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. 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 [13] 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

  • Shared space UK Department for Transport

External links

  1. ^ 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),[4] H 78-97.
  2. ^ a b c d e Moody, S. and Melia, S. "(2011) Shared space - implications of recent research for transport policy. Project Report. University of the West of England". Retrieved 22 February 2013. 
  3. ^ a b Ben Hamilton-Baillie. "What is Shared Space?" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-10-16. 
  4. ^ a b "Shared Space". Shared Space Institute. Booklets published by the EU partnership. 
  5. ^ Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2014). , 34(2), 190-220."Transport Reviews"A Review of the Evolution of Shared (Street) Space Concepts in Urban Environments, . 
  6. ^ a b c Department for Transport accessdate=2012. "(2011) Local Transport Note 1/11. Department for Transport, The Stationery Office, Norwich.". 
  7. ^ MVA Consultancy (October 2010). "Designing the Future: Shared Space: Operational Research. Department for Transport" (PDF). Retrieved 8 March 2015. 
  8. ^ Damian Arnold (2007-11-15). "UK traffic engineers lack skills for shared-space". New Civil Engineer. Retrieved 2008-02-01. 
  9. ^ a b "Shared Space: Room for Everyone: A New Vision for Public Spaces" (PDF). Shared Space (A European co-operation project). June 2005. 
  10. ^ a b 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). Retrieved 1 October 2008. 
  13. ^ 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),[5] H 78-97.
  14. ^ "In Europe, less is more when it comes to road signs". International Herald Tribune. Associated Press. 21 November 2006. Retrieved 16 October 2008. 
  15. ^ Guide Dogs for the Blind Association. "What's the Problem". Retrieved 4 December 2010. 
  16. ^ Shared street' problem for blind"'". BBC. 20 May 2009. Retrieved 4 December 2010. 
  17. ^ Guide Dogs for the Blind Association. """Shared Surfaces Campaign Report - "Stop shared surfaces, keep our pavements (pdf). Retrieved 27 September 2008. 
  18. ^ "Accidents by Design: The Holmes Report into Shared Space - Lord Holmes of Richmond MBE". Lord Holmes of Richmond MBE (in en-US). Retrieved 2015-10-17. 
  19. ^ Shared-space-intersection De Kaden
  20. ^ David Hembrow, "Shared Space", The View From the cycle Path ... (blog), November 12, 2008 (with subsequent updates) Accessed April 2, 2014
  21. ^ a b "Elliot Street - Accessibility".  
  22. ^ "Walkers first on naked streets". The Sydney Morning Herald. 18 October 2007. 
  23. ^ Heike Falk (September 2012). "Shared Space Implementation Sonnenfelsplatz in Graz, Austria". Eltis. Retrieved 19 March 2014. 
  24. ^ Mejsenwiki (December 2014). "Shared Space Implementation Denmark". MMW. Retrieved 15 December 2014. 
  25. ^ Catherine Bosley (11 September 2007). "Town ditches traffic lights to cut accidents". Reuters. Retrieved 14 September 2007. 
  26. ^ The Laweiplein, Evaluation of the reconstruction into a square with roundabout (PDF) (Report). Noordelijke Hogeschool Leeuwarden NHL. January 2007. Retrieved 5 September 2012. 
  27. ^ David Millward (4 November 2006). "Is this the end of the road for traffic lights?". London: The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 15 March 2015. 
  28. ^ [6]
  29. ^ Auckland City Council
  30. ^ Auckland City Council
  31. ^ City Scene, Auckland City Council
  32. ^ Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2013a). "Analysis of Pedestrian Performance in Shared Space Environment". 
  33. ^ Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2013b). "Evaluating Shared Spaces: Methodological Framework and Performance Index". 
  34. ^ Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Dunn, R. (2014). "Safety Performance Study of a Shared Pedestrian and Vehicle Space in New Zealand". 
  35. ^ Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. & Tse, M. (2011). "Shared space performance evaluation: Quantitative analysis of pre-implementation data" (PDF). 
  36. ^ "No accidents after road conversion in Norrköpping" (PDF). Shared Space. 2007. 
  37. ^
  38. ^ Manual for Streets. Department of Transport 2007 section 7.2.14
  39. ^
  40. ^ 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. 
  41. ^ Gould, Mark (12 April 2006). "Life on the open road". The Guardian (London). Retrieved 23 May 2010. 
  42. ^ "New Road City Centre Shared Space, Brighton (December 2007)". Scheme of the Month: January 2008. Cycling England. December 2007. 
  43. ^ "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. 
  44. ^ "Ringing the Changes: The Ashford Ring Road Project Kent County Council".  
  45. ^ "Just six accidents since Shared Space". Kent Online (KM Group). 20 January 2011. Retrieved 27 January 2011. 
  46. ^ "Winning streak continues for Ashford shared space scheme".  
  47. ^ Exhibition Road, London – reviewRowan Moore: , in The Guardian, 29 January 2012
  48. ^ "Planning Application 05/00285/REM, Planning Layout" (PDF). 18 February 2005. Retrieved 4 March 2007. 
  49. ^ "Poynton Town Centre: streetscape and place-making project". Institution of Civil Engineers. Retrieved 8 March 2015. 
  50. ^ McNichol, Tom (December 2004). "Roads Gone Wild". Wired (12.12). Retrieved 26 April 2006. 
  51. ^ Wilson, Thomas D. The Oglethorpe Plan. University of Virginia Press, 2012. chapter 5.



General themes

See also

In 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.[51]

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.[50]

United States

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.[49]

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.

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.[48]

Another scheme in London is the redevelopment of Exhibition Road, which is home to a number of world-class institutions, into a shared space. Following a design competition in 2003, a court case, and numerous community consultations, the scheme was completed in 2012.[47]

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.[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.[44] 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.[45] 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.[2]

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).[42][43]

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.

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.[40] 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%.[41]

The Transport Research Laboratory's research found that "below flows of 90 vehicles per hour pedestrians were prepared to mingle with traffic. When flows reached 110 vehicles per hour pedestrians used the width between frontages as if it were a traditional road, that is the majority of pedestrians remained on the equivalent of the footway and left the carriageway clear for vehicles... The study indicated that pedestrians were more at ease when the traffic flow consisted of buses only rather than a higher mix of general traffic.” [39]

The Department for Transport issued national guidance on shared space in 2011.[6] This is described as "evidence-based policy", drawing on research commissioned from MVA consultancy. This claim has challenged by one study questioning much of the evidence on which the guidance was based.[2] The Department for Transport’s “Manual for Streets” reports that "subject to making suitable provision for disabled people, shared surface streets are likely to work well where the volume of motor traffic is below 100 vehicles per hour (vph)(peak)”.[38]

United Kingdom

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.[37]


Since the Norrköping has experienced no accidents, mean traffic speeds have dropped from 21 to 16 km/h (13 to 10 mph) and livability has increased.[36]


Several of Auckland's streets have been turned into shared spaces.[28][29] These include Elliot and Darby Streets,[30] 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,[31] 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.[32][33][34][35]

New Zealand

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 which 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. However, public perceptions of traffic safety have declined.[26] 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.[27]


Bohmte introduced a shared space road system in September 2007. One of project's goals was to improve road safety in the town.[25]


Ejby, introduced a shared space project in Denmark. It was part of the European Interreg IIIB projekt 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.[24]


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.[23]


Bendigo, Victoria, plans (as of October 2007) to implement shared space in its city centre.[22]


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

Many streets in Tokyo are shared, though not as a result of outright policy.
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.[21]
A shared space scheme in Giles Circus, Ipswich (England)


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.[21]

More recently, David Hembrow has stated that Shared Space was an experiment that has been eclipsed by better ideas in Holland, where the real desire is to reduce but not entirely eliminate traffic in town centres. The key characteristic is "autoluwe", or "nearly car-free streets". Nearly car-free streets, he says, "is a concept which pre-dates the hype about "Shared Space", which remains popular, and which works precisely because the streets are not shared on an equal basis with cars.".[20] He also stated that sharing only works on roads with low speeds and very low volumes.

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.[19] 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."

[18] attacked the concept as a recipe for "confusion, chaos and catastrophe".Accidents by Design Lord Holmes' 2015 report [17], who have noted problems when negotiating a route with motor vehicle users, leading them to challenge its fundamental premise.Mencap, and Royal National Institute for Deaf People, the Leonard Cheshire Disability There have been similar concerns raised by other groups representing some of the more vulnerable members of society, including [16]

This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from World eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.