Design factors for a successful Shared Space Street (SSS) design
The concept of Shared Space Street (SSS) has the potential to bring many benefits to a city. Those include promotion of social interaction, the connectivity within the city for both vehicles and pedestrians, active engagement of the people with the space, walkability, vitality and street livability, better economic wealth and alike. These factors work together to improve livability, vitality of street and indirectly bring economic wealth to municipalities through increasing the footfall to shops, enhancing the health and safety of the locality and increasing the property values. Hence, this clearly is a consideration for strategic property management and relevant professionals. This concept has also been criticized for its practical issues when implemented in some parts of the world. Such issues include difficulties faced by aged people and people with disabilities, harassments faced by the cyclists, etc. This paper explores the methods and approaches that can be used to harness potential advantages of the SSS concept and to overcome its practical issues and criticisms through a detail evaluation of design driven use of space in three case studies within United Kingdom. Finally, this paper proposes a set of design factors which can be applied to a SSS design in order to ensure a successful implementation.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Burton, E., & Mitchell, L. (2006). Inclusive urban design: streets for life. Oxon: Routledge.
CABE. (2008). Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE). Retrieved from http://webarchive.nation-alarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.org.uk
Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Heath, T., & Oc, T. (2003). Public places urban spaces (2nd ed.). Burlington: Elsevier Publications.
Curl, A., Thompson, C. W., & Aspinall, P. (2015). The effectiveness of “shared space” residential street interventions on self-reported activity levels and quality of life for older people. Landscape and Urban Planning, 139, 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.019
Department for Transport. (2011). Local transport note 1/11: shared space street. Retrieved from http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/ltn-01-11/ltn-1-11-quantitative.pdf
Farrell, T. (2006). Bloomsbury, a strategic vision. Retrieved from http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/cms-service/stream/asset/?asset_id=2078939
Gehl, J. (2013). Cities for people. Island press.Gerlach, J., Methorst, R., Boenke, D., & Leven, J. (2008). Sense and nonsense about shared space. Retrieved from http://www.fietsberaad.nl/library/repository/bestanden/Shared%20Space_short_german-Eng.pdf
Hamilton-Baillie Associates. (2007). CREWKERNE a fresh approach to streets, traffic and public spaces. Retrieved from http://www.somersettownsforum.org.uk/uploads/documents/crewkernestreetsparkingreport.pdf
Hamilton-Baillie, B. (2008). Shared space: reconciling people, places and traffic. Built Environment, 34(2), 161-181. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.34.2.161
Healthy Cities. (2012). Designing streets for different users – New Road, Brighton and Hove. Retrieved from http://healthycities.org.uk/uploads/files/010_designing_street_for_different_us-ers___brighton_and_hove.pdf
Hebbert, M. (2003). New urbanism – the movement in context. Built Environment, 29(3), 193-209. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.126.96.36.199285
Holmes. L. C. (2015). Accidents by design: the Holmes report on “shared space” in the United Kingdom. Retrieved from https://www.theihe.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Holmes-Report-on-Shared-Space-.pdf
Imrie, R. (2012). Auto-disabilities: the case of shared space environments. Environment and Planning A, 44(9), 2260-2277. https://doi.org/10.1068/a44595
Jacobs, A. B. (1995). Great streets. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kaparias, I., Bell, M., Dong, W., Sastrawinata, A., Singh, A., Wang, X., & Mount, B. (2013). Analysis of pedestrian-vehicle traffic conflicts in street designs with elements of shared space. Transportation Research Record, 2393, 21-30. https://doi.org/10.3141/2393-03
Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D. J., & Dunn, R. (2014). A review of the evolution of shared (street) space concepts in urban environments. Transport Reviews, 34(2), 190-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2014.893038
MacMichael, S. (2009). Oxford Circus gets shared space crossing as naked streets momentum grows. Retrieved from http://road.cc/content/news/10654-oxford-circus-gets-shared-space-crossing-naked-streets-momentum-grows
Matthew, B. (2012). Country observer: news. Retrieved from http://www.coventryobserver.co.uk/2012/02/24/news-Petitions-to-axe-shared-space-junctions-ignored-31235.html
Pharoah, T. (2008, October). Shared space in action. The 9th Walk21 International Walking Conference A Moving City. Barcelona, Spain.
Public Realm Information & Advice Network. (2011). Mixed use streets: 5 characteristics of successful shared space. Retrieved from http://www.publicrealm.info/faq’s/shared_space_case_study.pdf
Talen, E. (1999). Sense of community and neighbourhood form: an assessment of the social doctrine of new urbanism. Urban Studies, 36(8), 1361-1379. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098993033
The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association. (2014). Shared surfaces. Retrieved from http://www.guidedogs.org.uk/supportus/campaigns/streets-ahead/shared-surfaces
The Royal Borough of South Kensington and Chelsea. (2012). The exhibition road. Retrieved from http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/subsites/exhibitionroad.aspx