Shared Space "Streets"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 3:56 AM GMT
    140917173249-exhbition-road-shared-space

    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/22/living/shared-spaces/index.html?hpt=hp_mid

    I could see this happening in San Francisco. It could potentially remove more cars from use, thus reducing the demand for carbon fossil fuels.

    Would this work in your city?
    What are your thoughts?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 6:52 PM GMT
    If you did this is SF it would be like it is in Rome all of the "shared" space would be solid cars.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 7:03 PM GMT
    I nearly witnessed my godson getting run over on this exact street, so I would say they are a dumb idea.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 7:11 PM GMT
    Denver has its down town 16th street;
    it runs from Union Station up to Colfax av. Its a pedestrian walk way that the city runs a free shuttle up down. In a sense it is a shared space; pedestrians and the shuttle.
    Maybe a mile or two long. My husband works downtown and its actually useful. I park for free outside the DMZ downtown area and take the shuttle.

    next year the lite rail will be running and a station is located next door the new house. will only infrequently need the car.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 8:17 PM GMT
    The city would be a huge parking lot.

    Speaking of which, the large parking lots at malls are the very definition of "shared space," and the traffic flows much smoother than the actual streets...not to mention safer for everyone.

    So yeah, I'm in favor of a city-wide parking lot.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 8:31 PM GMT
    It could work. What's needed is a diagram to explain the structural changes in the street directing the car and discouraging speeding, reckless cars.
  • BAHBAA

    Posts: 122

    Sep 23, 2014 8:33 PM GMT
    I don't get it. Is there suddenly a problem with using the sidewalk?
  • MikemikeMike

    Posts: 6932

    Sep 23, 2014 8:35 PM GMT
    If only men were this responsible when it comes to sex! HIV and AIDS would be a non issue.
    That traffic crap will not work in major cities until we have faster public tubes. Maybe magnetic ones like in Logan's Run the old movie.
    But you only live to 30 bummer!
  • Aleco_Graves

    Posts: 708

    Sep 23, 2014 11:54 PM GMT
    What do you tell your insurance when a guy drives into your car when you try and park, who is at fault. How much do you sue the man for driving into you where "you were walking".
    Who's at fault then? This would make absolutely no sense in a world where humanity is code for savages with comb-overs that wear monkey suits.

    IDIOTS NEED RULES
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 25, 2014 7:10 AM GMT
    BAHBAA saidI don't get it. Is there suddenly a problem with using the sidewalk?


    The white Liberal moral busybodies are at it again. "We must get people out of their cars" is an article of faith for them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2014 10:48 PM GMT
    Jack_NNJ said
    BAHBAA saidI don't get it. Is there suddenly a problem with using the sidewalk?


    The white Liberal moral busybodies are at it again. "We must get people out of their cars" is an article of faith for them.


    The white Conservatards are at it again. Missing an obvious--and might I add--hilarious joke.

    parked_on_sidewalk.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2014 11:51 PM GMT
    GAMRican said140917173249-exhbition-road-shared-space

    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/22/living/shared-spaces/index.html?hpt=hp_mid

    I could see this happening in San Francisco. It could potentially remove more cars from use, thus reducing the demand for carbon fossil fuels.

    Would this work in your city?
    What are your thoughts?


    GAMRican, full disclosure, I work for one of the agencies that would have a key role in implementing these in SF. We'd love to install more. I'd recommend anyone who thinks they can't work to take a look at Linden Street in the Hayes Valley, or heck, just take a trip down some of the many alleys in Chinatown.

    Another good example would be to take a look at Jack London Square in Oakland. Oakland is more auto-oriented than SF, but it still seems to work.

    Unfortunately, SF interprets the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) more strictly than just about any other municipality, and trying to design around these requirements ultimately defeats the purpose of the shared space. The reason the streets can be safer than conventional streets is because they are designed so that it's impossible to speed through them (and speed is by far and away the most important factor in how injured someone is after a collision). This "slow" design happens in part because there are no clear boundaries between pedestrian and auto space. However, that runs completely counter to ADA guidelines.

    I think these can be implemented over time, but it will take some cultural change, from both motorists and disabilities advocates.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2014 7:08 PM GMT
    Picture a city street in any big american city before the hordes of motorized vehicles - streetcars, wagons, carriages and pedestrians all sharing the same space. It was the pedestrians who paid the big price - many killed every year.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2014 11:03 PM GMT
    CFL_Oakland said
    GAMRican said140917173249-exhbition-road-shared-space

    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/22/living/shared-spaces/index.html?hpt=hp_mid

    I could see this happening in San Francisco. It could potentially remove more cars from use, thus reducing the demand for carbon fossil fuels.

    Would this work in your city?
    What are your thoughts?


    GAMRican, full disclosure, I work for one of the agencies that would have a key role in implementing these in SF. We'd love to install more. I'd recommend anyone who thinks they can't work to take a look at Linden Street in the Hayes Valley, or heck, just take a trip down some of the many alleys in Chinatown.

    Another good example would be to take a look at Jack London Square in Oakland. Oakland is more auto-oriented than SF, but it still seems to work.

    Unfortunately, SF interprets the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) more strictly than just about any other municipality, and trying to design around these requirements ultimately defeats the purpose of the shared space. The reason the streets can be safer than conventional streets is because they are designed so that it's impossible to speed through them (and speed is by far and away the most important factor in how injured someone is after a collision). This "slow" design happens in part because there are no clear boundaries between pedestrian and auto space. However, that runs completely counter to ADA guidelines.

    I think these can be implemented over time, but it will take some cultural change, from both motorists and disabilities advocates.


    I'll make the assumption that you are an "Urban Planner" or other related professional. I too touch professionally on this topic thread through "Emergency Management" and "Urban Forestry" related work I do.

    True on the observations of Linden Street and Jack London Square. And, the point about "speed" appears to be a key factor in what makes shared space more "civilized" and able to work.

    Your point on the ADA is something I did not consider, and is an overarching set of United States national compliance requirements which would really need thinking through. As in, "How might specific features of shared space be mapped to demonstrate compliance with ADA?, and "What are the gaps which need innovative solutions to bridge the gaps?".

    As a pedestrian who rides public transporation and rarely drives in SF, I am almost continually aware of the speed of bicycles and motorized vehicles as I walk around the city. I have to be aware or I'm sure I will die a violent, traffic related death!

    I continually say an internal "Yay!" every time I see some infrastructure change which constricts the volume of private motorized traffic (i.e. 1-person in a car), and slows the volume of private motorized vehicular traffic. I also say an internal "Yay!" every time I see some infrastructure change which improves the relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency of human powered (e.g. bicycle, skateboard) and motorized public transit. Note, I did not specifically use the words "volume" and "speed" on that last sentence.

    My thought is that the more of a pain in the a$$ and expensive it is to own and operate a personal motorized vehicle in SF while at the same time making it more desirable and less costly to use human powered and motorized public transit options, the more of a shift from one mode to another will occur. I change when I have the right mix of pain and desire. I'm making the assumption that other people do the same. And of course, the rich will generally be able to suffer the cost pain more than the less rich.

    Certainly, there will be challenges going forward. However, with cities continuing to grow, private motorized vehicles seem less like a sustainable, effective and efficient mode of transportation for our planet.