Introduction

Imagine a busy intersection. Cars are lined up at the lights and their passengers are getting frustrated. Pedestrians and cyclists exploit their “right of way” and are less than mindful of cars. There is a lot of traffic and a lot of waiting at signs and lights for everyone. How does one improve this intersection so that people can get through quicker and there are fewer accidents? Add more signs, maybe a bridge, maybe a few extra lanes for traffic?

“Solving” problems usually involves adding more things to the environment. Adding something else to the mess may solve one problem but it usually creates another. It goes back to the expression “less is more”. Only when the environment is de-cluttered, can problems begin to get solved. In this case, what if all of the signs, lights, crosswalks, lines on the road and curbs were taken away?

Hans Monderman, a Dutch civil engineer, implemented this in the Netherlands and it is now spreading throughout Europe, South Africa, Australia and Japan. In 1982 Monderman was made the road safety inspector in Oudehaske, Friesland. There were budget cuts made to traffic calming measures and there had been several recent traffic fatalities in this town. To save money and increase the safety of the streets, Monderman eliminated the signs and other “street furniture”, creating a flat surface where people in all modes of transportation had to negotiate their own right of way. “Exceeding even his own expectations, Monderman found that the plan cut vehicle speeds by fifty percent. The absence of all traffic controls increased drivers’ awareness and thus forced them to slow down.” (“Hans Monderman”). In Haren, the Netherlands, the same system was applied. The number of accidents at one intersection dropped by 95 percent. The polie officer in charge of traffic planning, Peter Hilbricht said. “You can’t deny the numbers, half the world is eager to see what’s going to happen with this program.” (Whitlock, Craig).

With no implements in place to organize the traffic, the expected result would be chaos. However, travellers (pedestrians, motorists and cyclists alike) make up a self-organizing system. They do not need the signs, lights or lines. Traffic moves slower, but civilians get where they are going faster and are happier in doing so (Clarke, Emma).

New York Times journalist, Sarah Lyall, in 2005, visited Drachten, a town in the Netherlands with Monderman engineering:

“Not only was it virtually naked, stripped of all lights, signs and road markings, but there was no division between road and sidewalk. It was, basically, a bare brick square.

“But in spite of the apparently anarchical layout, the traffic, a steady stream of trucks, cars, buses, motorcycles, bicycles and pedestrians, moved along fluidly and easily, as if directed by an invisible conductor. When Monderman, a traffic engineer and the intersection’s proud designer, deliberately failed to check for oncoming traffic before crossing the street, the drivers slowed for him. No one honked or shouted rude words out the window.

‘”Who has the right of way?” he asked rhetorically. “I don’t care. People here have to find their own way, negotiate for themselves, use their own brains.”’

When people drive, they tend to only pay attention to what they are doing and not to what everyone else is doing. People do not interact or make eye contact with others. When talking about busy roads with many signs, Mondeman said: “All those signs are saying to cars, ‘this is your space, and we have organized your behavior so that as long as you behave this way, nothing can happen to you’. That is the wrong story”

Monderman’s ideas emphasize the concept of “shared space. Shared space relies on environmental context—in this case, a street where cars and pedestrians are equal, and the design tells the driver what to do (Lyall) —to influence human behavior (Barnett, Erica). Human interaction causes a safer and more pleasant place for motorists, pedestrians and cyclists (“Hans Monderman”). “The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context. As a result, behavior is controlled by everyday norms of behavior, which means drivers slow down, take more care and start to rely on eye contact and human interaction.” (Clarke, Emma).

With this comes the concept of “home zones”, places where people feel comfortable and at home. The time spent traveling in between these “home zones” is a “dead zone”, lost time left unaccounted. These home-zones need to be extended so that they begin to include the roads where people travel. The success of the expansion of home-zones is reliant, not only on effective and well thought out plans, but also on an entire community’s involvement (“Concept”). This means that people need to interact more as they move between places they feel comfortable. “Through the syntheses between traffic and public interaction we could build wonderful places that can tell the story of our past, the heritage and the cultural identity of place” (Monderman).

Madison, Wisconsin, being a city with over forty thousand college students, has a very high number of pedestrians and cyclists. During class changes especially, pedestrians and cyclists completely take over the streets and assume the right of way. Still, there is a lot of time wasted at stoplights and there are separate bike lanes and sidewalks. On average, there are 120,654 crashes every year in Wisconsin. 1,343 of them involve pedestrians and 1,099 involve bicycles (“Final Year Crash Statistics”). The system of transportation in Wisconsin is in need of change. By instituting Monderman’s idea of shared space, there would be fewer traffic accidents and transportation times would decrease.

Works Cited

Barnett, Erica. “’Shared Space’ Traffic Calming: Counterintuitive, But It Works.” World Changing: Changing Your Thinking. N.p., 4 Jan. 2008. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.worldchanging.com/‌archives/‌007750.html>.

Clarke, Emma. “Shared Space – the alternative approach to calming traffic.” TEC: Traffic, Engineering and Control Sept. 2006: 290-292. Free Webs. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.freewebs.com/‌mjcassini/‌Shared%20Space.pdf>.

“Concept.” Home Zones. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.homezones.org/‌concept.html>.

“Final Year Crash Statistics, Madison.” Wisconsin Department of Transportation. N.p., 29 Aug. 2010. Web. 22 Nov. 2011. <http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/‌drivers/‌drivers/‌traffic/‌crash/‌final.htm>.

“Hans Monderman.” Project for Public Spaces. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.pps.org/‌articles/‌hans-monderman/>.

Lyall, Sarah. “Road design? He calls it a revolution.” The New York Times. N.p., 22 Jan. 2005. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.nytimes.com/‌2005/‌01/‌21/‌world/‌europe/‌21iht-profile.html?pagewanted=all>.

Monderman (1of10) – Drachten Eye Contact. YouTube. N.p., 7 Mar. 2007. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.youtube.com/‌watch?v=Xo3KWHqmDhA>.

Whitlock, Craig. “A Green Light for Common Sense.” The Washington Post. N.p., 24 Dec. 2007. Web. 17 Nov. 2011. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/‌wp-dyn/‌content/‌article/‌2007/‌12/‌23/‌AR2007122302487.html>.