Shared road space

Interesting publication from the DfT around sharing roadspace
http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/ltn-01-11

Here's an extract:
Eye contact
2.21 It has often been suggested that, when crossing a shared space, it is essential for
pedestrians to make eye contact with drivers. However, during research into user
interaction in shared space, no instances of negotiation by eye contact were
observed – indeed, there appeared to be very little overtly demonstrative
communication of any sort between pedestrians and drivers. Instead, people tend
to communicate through more subtle signals, and this communication can often be
one-way. For example, drivers tend to slow down for people who appear as if they
are about to cross, even though they may not have expressed any intention of
doing so (or even have been aware of the driver). A pedestrian wishing to cross a
Shared Space might initially look for approaching vehicles, but there is nothing to
suggest that this is any different from what takes place when people cross a
conventional street.
2.22 Eye contact cannot be relied upon, given the difficulty in establishing it with a driver through a vehicle windscreen, especially at a distance. It is important that this is understood to avoid undermining the confidence of blind and partially sighted people using shared space.

Transport for london has been actively facilitating sharing of road space for a while now. Part of the recent HGV driver training course 'Safe urban driving" looks at the changing streetscape letting drivers know that they can expect to be sharing the road with vulnerable road users more in London and teaching them how to behave in these spaces.

Perhaps it is now incumbent on cycle trainers to emphasise pedestrian priority a little more in training. Even include this (Give way to pedestrians who are crossing the road) as a level 2 outcome.

Point at car, extend arm and give an assertive palm out stop sign... usually works! but works on regular streets anyway just as well, the whole shared space is bullshit though if anyone expects cars to actually give way without being directed too.

Changing the street culture takes time. The more we are encouraged to share space through design of streets/low speeds etc. the more drivers will begin to drive carefully. Despite some major glitches/idiots London drivers are noticeably becoming tamed by the mass cycling here.

on eye contact:

I had been an assertive pedestrian and cyclist for a decade and thought that my skills were somehow lacking cause I failed to use eye contact that was advocated in many respectful competent cycling advice. Then I read this and stopped worrying:

This eye-contact argument has been repeated endlessly as if there were
meaning to it. For most traffic cycling situations, at least at my
speeds, at the times that it is necessary to decide what another driver
is going to do, typically most of the distances are too great to
determine which way the other driver's eyes are pointed, or there is no
direct line of sight from one set of eyes to the other set. Like so many
others of the instructions prepared by those who know nothing, its
authors have never tested it to see whether or not it works in the real
world of traffic operations.

John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove CA 91945
619-644-5481
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/chainguard/message/24799

I love the picture on the cover of the LTN. Like, " oh yeah Seven Dials is such a great place to hang out". Nearly got taken out by a taxi there not long ago. He wasn't up for sharing. It's a busy roundabout for most of the day. Utter balls.

IMO you can't share space with someone who is taking up way more then their share of that space. eg someone in a car. Will these new calmer drivers allow others as much space as they are comsuming? It's like sitting next to a really vast bloke on an economy flight. You have a shit flight.

Boris should just bite the bullet and make some roads car free.

Re eye contact: It's good, we should all have some from time to time. "people tend to communicate through more subtle signals"... I find if i stagger about like i am drunk it really helps people to share the space with me. I get loads of space! Works whilst riding too although i'm not sure it would make a good level 2 outcome ;-)

Perhaps it is now incumbent on cycle trainers to emphasise pedestrian priority a little more in training. Even include this (Give way to pedestrians who are crossing the road) as a level 2 outcome.

I have noticed that recently the somewhat hysterical stories about cyclists being a "menace" to pedestrians has increased both in frequency and stridance. We all know what the main threat is to all our safety...

Personally, I always get a few pithy examples of ped priority into my sessions but if TFL are trying to lump us all together in "shared space" it really is only going to get worse. Pedestrians do not want to share the space with people moving faster then them, in my experience. We all know that speed differentials make a big impact (see what i did there?)

Integrate, segregate or share? NS cycling is not at odds with segregation as is so often stated in various pro infrastructure blogs. In reality it is a form of segregation. It segregates pedestrians from people using vehicles. Real integration is shared space.

... level 2 outcome.

Jesus cripes. Sometimes I wonder if I'm really living on the same planet as the bureaucrats who live for this shit.

Shit like this changes NOTHING.

Care to expand on that?

This eye-contact argument has been repeated endlessly as if there were
meaning to it. For most traffic cycling situations, at least at my
speeds, at the times that it is necessary to decide what another driver
is going to do, typically most of the distances are too great to
determine which way the other driver's eyes are pointed, or there is no
direct line of sight from one set of eyes to the other set. Like so many
others of the instructions prepared by those who know nothing, its
authors have never tested it to see whether or not it works in the real
world of traffic operations.
John Forester,

That is an interesting point kalle. The effect of speed on eye contact. Situations where eye contact works is where driver/cyclists speeds are similar, drivers pulling out of junctions so are slow, they are also actively looking so eye contact is useful. In moving traffic it is often the car (Drivers slows, hangs back) that gives the clue that the cyclists has been seen and it's ok to move across a lane or in front of the car.

I often notice pedestrians stepping onto the road, noticing I'm cycling along then some look away, turn their head, which doesn't give me a chance to slow and give way to them, making eye contact. Perhaps this behaviour is born out of the futility of attempting eye contact with drivers who are driving at speed and behind windscreens. Could this change as pedestrians need to negotiate more with cyclists where eye contact would help them be assertive?

Could more assertive pedestrians be outcome of the london cycling increase? Just like drivers are beginning to give cyclists more space and cyclists are more likely to claim the space.

@Londonneur I like the fact that TfL are actively encouraging shared space through design. Early days yet though. It's an active attempt to reverse the dominance of motors in many places and following that logic pedestrians should be the kings of the road.

@Not Jackie Chan. Welcome to the cycle training forum

@Not Jackie Chan. Welcome to the cycle training forum

Second that.

@Skydancer. The problem I see is that little islands of "shared space" don't really work in isolation. It's particularly useless if loads of parking is included in the design (as per Exhibition Rd.). This makes it a final destination for drivers, actually encouraging them to drive there. When TFL are proposing the removal of parking bays, we will know they are serious. Better and much much cheaper would be to simply ban all motorised vehicles(except essential access) across a selected network of roads. That would flood the city with cyclists which in turn would calm everything. Cheap as chips! I know, I know.... aint gonna happen but I can dream can't I?

TFL are rather two faced on this in any case. As you do, I welcome anything thay do to reduce car dominance, even with my reservations. But take a look at the Blackfriars proposals or what they have just done at Henleys Corner and you can see the utter confusion of approach. At Henleys Corner they have just converted it into what is essentially a motorway interchange. It was never good for cyclists but now it's a deathtrap. I going to post a video on that soon.

AS you said, London drivers may be getting better at sharing the road. What has caused this? Cute granite sets? I think not. A wager.... Do 12mph down the center of the lane on Exhibition road and see how willing the driver behind is to "share". I'll buy the shandys if that goes well ;-) These expensive remodellings are "playing round the edges". It's time TFL stepped up!

Having done a bit of advanced driver training in the past EYE CONTACT is not, imho, actually about eye contact - it is about the philosophy of eye contact.

So, I am at a road junction, there is a bus behind me, I turn, try to make eye contact with the driver - by trying to make eye contact I am sending a message that not only am I here, I am a human being that would respond very badly to being run over.

You can't expect eye contact, but philosophically, and in the signals we send when we try to achieve it, we are making the roads a better place.

Dont even get me going on the value of the words 'smile' and 'sorry'.

Right, as you were.

Here is a recent Tweet I saw:

Blackpool #sharedspace at night. http://yfrog.us/ng866z http://yfrog.us/7b8h6z http://yfrog.us/bgsjez

My question is, Who has priority?
I believe the scheme has reduced accidents but I am left wondering what happens in the event of one.

For example, if a ped gets hit on a crossing as opposed to crossing somewhere else(J walking) it becomes a mitigating factor with respect insurance claims. A lifetime of phisio theraspy is expensive so losing some of that money would be real bad. Use the crossings....

In shared space, would a driver be able to say, "he just stepped in front of me"? If you are hit whilst walking across a signalled crossing on green, it is clearly the drivers liability but in SS it seems to me that liability might be mitagated by as much as 50% as priority is equal (?). Half the cost to repair the car vs. half a lifetime of medical care doesn't seem like sharing to me. Obviously Strict Liability would deal with it but here in the UK we aint got it.

What is the legal highway code position on liability with respesct SS?

Thoughts? Am I just wrong?

Highway code rule 170
"Give way to pedestrians who have started to cross"
Pedestrians always have right of way

on eye contact:

I had been an assertive pedestrian and cyclist for a decade and thought that my skills were somehow lacking cause I failed to use eye contact that was advocated in many respectful competent cycling advice. Then I read this and stopped worrying:

http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/chainguard/message/24799

I disagree with Forester (who is one of the most knowledgeable people in cycling) on this. There is certainly no need to go overboard on eye contact, i.e. it would be nonsense to suggest that you should always attempt it at night, or through tinted car windows, etc. People certainly shouldn't think that if they find little application for it, they're somehow doing it wrong. Regardless of what's taught in training, people will get most of it right, but not all of it, approximately to the extent to which their personal riding styles mesh with what they've learned.

There is a tendency with some elements of cycle training, e.g. primary position, to exaggerate the applicability and to over-emphasise one element at the expense of others.

The disagreement about eye contact is largely one of degree, and this is where differences between different cities come in. In London, there are plenty of interactions, e.g. at tight junctions, where eye contact with drivers comes in very handy, and rarely fails. Also, with levels of walking so high in London, I find eye contact with pedestrians who might step out into the carriageway without proper care essential. It's not the be-all and end-all, but it is a very useful tool in the toolbox.

I would probably agree with him that in most traffic environments in the US, there is relatively little point in eye contact, as you just don't tend to get that close to people a lot of the time.

i.e. it would be nonsense to suggest that you should always attempt it at night, or through tinted car windows, etc.

The thing is, I DO successfully use "eye contact" in those situations where you cant see the persons face at all- a driver behind a tinted window can still see you even if you cant see them.

As Bagheera said earlier, it's more the philosophy of communication rather than the actual eye contact with the driver that has the effect of asserting your rights on the road. I sometimes turn my head to the left towards a driver in a side road, but am actually looking straight ahead- they think I am looking at them and give way whilst I am actually watching something else that is going on up ahead and clocking them in my peripheral vision. I also find that, if I am wearing sunglasses (or a peak cap) it seems easier to make the eye contact, as the movement of my head is much more obvious. Glancing over your shoulder with a peak cap on seems to have a greater effect than without. Looking at a driver (who you cant even see) at night, whilst wearing a peak cap, seems to have the effect of making eye contact as they catch the movement of your head in their eye.

As for Shared Space environments- roads ARE supposed to be shared space already, just the power balance is up the spout.
Engineered Shared Space environments do seem to address this power imbalance as the removal of kerbs and the seperation between the road and pavement, makes pedestrians feel more at ease, they make LESS eye contact. Some might call SS a "riskier environment" because there is less seperation between "incompatible" types of vehicle. But in this case the higher risk seems to put the onus back on the driver (perpetrator) to avoid collision rather than the pedestrian (victim) because the driver feel more on edge and their natural instinct to not plough into anyone kicks in.
Shared Space also makes life less conflicted between pedestrians and cyclists- apparently there is more conflict (aggression, confusion and crashes) where there is a shared path with a big fat white line down the middle than in the same sized space with no divider line. People seem to actually be able to muddle along together in "shared space" and the pedestrians dont get all up in arms about cyclists being in"their" space.
The question is, does it work just because it is a bit new and people aren't used to functioning in that environment? Will people get used to it eventually and everything returns to how it currently is?

The thing is, I DO successfully use "eye contact" in those situations where you cant see the persons face at all- a driver behind a tinted window can still see you even if you cant see them.

As Bagheera said earlier, it's more the philosophy of communication rather than the actual eye contact with the driver that has the effect of asserting your rights on the road. I sometimes turn my head to the left towards a driver in a side road, but am actually looking straight ahead- they think I am looking at them and give way whilst I am actually watching something else that is going on up ahead and clocking them in my peripheral vision. I also find that, if I am wearing sunglasses (or a peak cap) it seems easier to make the eye contact, as the movement of my head is much more obvious. Glancing over your shoulder with a peak cap on seems to have a greater effect than without. Looking at a driver (who you cant even see) at night, whilst wearing a peak cap, seems to have the effect of making eye contact as they catch the movement of your head in their eye.

All fair points. I meant 'eye contact' quite literally here, i.e. two-way communication. It is of course also important to let people see your face to 'humanise' you.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/31/end-for-zebra-crossings

A new report from the Hansard Society - A Place for People – Proposals for Enhancing Visitor Engagement with Parliament’s Environs - exploring how better use can be made of the Westminster World Heritage Site and Parliament Square concludes that rather than a place of national pride this landmark area is a national disgrace.

Give me space advert on TV in scotland
Give Me Cycle Space Ad - "Arms" - YouTube

nice vid might get that to some schools
buttons to press here
http://www.iam.org.uk/policy-and-research/sharing-the-road

Caught tail end of radio prog
Seeking info on Martin Casini?
Ben Hamilton Bailey
And schemes in Poynton.
Will search soon if anyone has links that would be great.

Casini is a shared space advocate. His views seem to be about people communicating with each other rather than relying on signals and signs. (Like hans Moderman). There is this today about getting rid of traffic lights (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18072259) which makes sense to me.
People have been going on about these ideas for decades and the road safety people keep doing the same old stuff.

(Which is one of the reasons why i think the Go Dutch thing is misguided as a campaigning theme since it works within the classic road safety approach coming up with separating modes rather than campaigning to make our places suitable for all modes together)

The increasing incidences of lights being turned off for roadworks etc leading to press and mainstream driver opinion in favour is interesting.
There are shared space schemes around the country being built now which are turning things upside down and were gonna watch as this plays out.
Until RS depts get up to date it will be snail pace (like vehicular traffic ironically)

There are shoots of understanding in London which accounts partially to the increase in bike riding . This is wel understood by many at TfL. Though boris traffic smoothing agenda flies in the face of what some of his own people understand. The answers are not too complex or hard to implement. Main one is simply accepting lower speeds across the board that would lead to many fewer desths and injuries.

Just reading traffic by Tom Vanderbuilt. Seems that the same number of people killed on 7/7 bombing where killed in the 3 months following that on the roads by drivers, and will die every 3 months more or less yet transport police have been taken to anti terrorist squads.

The perversity of the recent IAM poll about rljing is another example of completely squewed understanding of who does the harm. Many many more people are harmed by poor, lazy, aggressive illegal sloppy and unnecessary driving and when asked most drivers rate themselves as above average.

We tolerate this death and injury, blight and misery, pollution and disease caused by people who choose to drive because that's what most people do. It's normal. We get effective but novel one off events much more than the ongoing blood on the tracks

Now this attitude to crap driving is a go Dutch campaign that makes sense
When cyclists matter - YouTube