The naked streets of Ashford

When I was at college I always used to use traffic lights in my arguments with libertarians. "If you really don't want any government intervention," I used to say, "what, then, about traffic lights?"

I took it for granted that anyone sane wouldn't want to get rid of traffic lights.

But perhaps I was wrong.

In Ashford they are experimenting with naked streets:

Drivers no longer have the right of way on the ring road in Ashford, Kent, and have to negotiate their way across junctions, with no signs or lines to guide them. All road users, whether travelling on foot, by bicycle, car or bus, have equal priority and must use eye contact to decide who goes first.

The town is embracing the concept of "shared space", which was invented in the Netherlands and is based on the principle that creating uncertainty on the roads makes them safer.

If this experiment works, the implications are profound. After all you could suggest that if even traffic lights aren't necessary, then what intervention is?

It is hard, however, to predict what might happen. I suspect that people won't be mown down. But will they be able to cross the road?

There is more than one equilibrium. In one case cars will stop immediately on seeing a pedestrian (possibly causing traffic jams), in another pedestrians may find it almost impossible to cross and just be left standing, in a third there could be give and take.

Intervention may not be necessary once any one of these equilibria is settled upon, but it may be in order to move between them and settle upon the best.

Comments

[Richard Young]

I've seen this experiment in action thanks to failed traffic lights at the junction of Grand Drive and Bushey Road in Raynes Park. The traffic did seem to flow more easily. And there didn't seem to be any accidents (indeed, it's more usual to see "near misses" at that junction thanks to confusion about the junction layout and filtered lights). But two big downsides were apparent. First, pedestrians had a hard time and I wouldn't have wanted to cycle the junction at all. Second, if there had been an accident, how would the insurance companies decide liability? With lights and rights of way, it's easy - with "eye contact", not so clear.

Which is why we have "government intervention" - or more accurately, "rules". They level the playing field, ensure the weaker in society don't get mown down, establish procedures to resolve disputes and help us to be a little less selfish. Seems like a good thing...

[Richard Evans]

Not sure I'd agree that it's hard to predict the results. As well as Holland, it's been tried with some success in Germany and Sweden, and there was even a small trial in a village in Wiltshire. From what I've heard, it seems to have cut the number of accidents.

[Kev]

Who here has had a near miss because they were worrying about all the signage surrounding them!

[Sam B]

I don't know what your college friends replied, but no libertarian should have great difficulty with justifying traffic lights so long as they believe a) the State should own the public road network and b) actions that create an intolerable risk of injury or damage to someone else should be a crime, even if it doesn't actually happen.

There are probably libertarians who disagree with one or both, but if you believe that all roads should be privately owned and/or that attempted murder should not be a crime, you can be safely classified as on the fringe.

So a fairly solid libertarian answer would be this: One of the state's legitimate jobs is to ensure that traffic can flow smoothly on the public roads that it owns. Traffic lights are an important means to that end. Violating traffic lights, quite apart from violating the agreement made with the State when you drove onto its roads, creates an intolerable risk of damaging someone else's property or body, and should justly be considered a crime.

As to the actual project, traffic lights and certainly signage in general are overused. Bear in mind we manage without them on motorways, despite driving extra fast on them.

[Rob]

Has anyone done research on whether speeds slow down excessively in naked streets? I can see why a slower speed would help road safety in a built-up area, but on a ring road, for heaven's sake? The point of a ring road is to keep traffic moving. Does traffic keep moving in a naked ring road with a million "eye contacts" going on?

[Londoner20]

I think there's a case for turning them off in the dead of night in some areas. Not only would it save energy/money but often when driving at night you'll be sitting there in the car waiting at a red light with no other cars using the junction at all.

[Steve King]

As usual, the UK is not doing this properly. In the Netherlands, the rule of the road is that drivers of cars etc are assumed to be to blame for collisions with pedestrians and cyclists. This seems fair: the user of the more dangerous mode of transport has to take additional care so that all road users have an equal right to use the space safely. Drivers can no longer use the threat of the harm that can be done by their vehicle to force people out of their way. We need to have such a rule in the UK too.

[Dave Madley]

Come to Spain and see how people use traffic lights "Loosely"

[dee]

I'm not so sure, on a recent visit to Naples there were rules but no one followed them, motorbikes used zebra crossings (much to the surprise of pedestrians coming the other way) and getting accross the road was very scary for a fit and able person, god knows how the old, dissabled or blind would go on. If one car stopped the one behind simply overtook it. In the space of 3 days I saw a man knocked of his bike and a pedestrian struck by a bus while he crossed a zebra crossing.
It may be a good idea in quiet areas but busy junctions need something to protect those who are more vulnerable.

[b]

I think its a very interesting concept and worth pursuing to see if it works and makes the roads flow smoother and less aggressively.
Speaking as a London based cyclist/pedestrian I have some trepidation however ... There are an awful lot of very aggressive, selfish drivers around - far more than in Holland, I would suggest, people who believe in being pushy and grabbing what they want, when they want it, with no regard whatsoever for other people.
Would a new road system 'civilise' them? Or just encourage them to be even more aggressive and anti-social?
I can see the system working for cars/vehicles, as a cyclist I would be far more wary of my personal safety.

But its defiantely worth a try, would like to see it.

[Frank Upton]

It would be safer in most cases to replace traffic lights with mini-roundabouts, or other features that force us to slow down without always requiring us to stop.

[jon]

This can work. I visited Beirut in the 90's when there were still no traffic lights. People worked things out. I am in favour of experimentation. The results are often counter-intuitive. Seeing my mother getting frailer as time passes, my only condition would be that cyclists should NEVER be allowed on the footpath. The penalty for infringement should be DEATH.

[RBingham]

One of the (many) problems on British roads is the lack of a "give way/priority rule".

In most European countries it works something like this:

1. Obey the traffic lights or road signs
2. If no signs or lights, or if lights are not working - obey road markings
3. If no road markings - give way to traffic on the right

Takes care of just about any situation.

Well done, Ashford, if ALL road-users apply common sense and courtesy this should work.

[Kam]

I live in a place near Naples where we have junction affectionately named 'Crazy Crossroads'. Traffic here seems to run smoother when the traffic lights are not working and people have to look at the cars and people around them to negotiate a route through. In the UK we have become too reliant on road signs to tell us what to do and we tend to overlook just looking around us.

[Martin]

Traffic lights are the principal cause of congestion on roads. When broken down there is never a long queue, often junctions where you would expect a queue of traffic are clear. Congestion causes pollution and the impression on drivers that they are being held up unnecessarily. Congested junctions are more difficult for pedestrians to negotiate because the traffic comes in long streams, with no gap to safely cross. Cyclists can get ahead of cars queuing at lights, but then have a constant stream of cars trying to pass them after the lights change.

The idea that naked streets challenge is that when something needs to change in a road design then something new needs to be added to make it work better. Hans Monderman took the view that the road space could often be improved by taking something away. Sadly Monderman passed away in January this year but it is good to know that his ideas are still being brought into practice.

[Simon Snape]

Well done Ashford indeed.

We invest too much in simple electro magnetic and solid state electrical devices when the human brain is far more capable of resolving the most complex situations involved.

In addition I fully endorse the ideas that, where traffic lights are deemed essential it should be legal to filter left on a red where there is no crossing traffic AND that late at night and the early morning lights should be set at amber in all directions.

Any legitimate road safety concers are best addressed by improving Driver training, mandatory driver competence checks and recurrent training and Real Police monitoring.

[Adrian Shurmer]

A psychological approach to driving is discussed within a book entitled Mind How You Go.
ISBN 978-0-9554597-0-2

This is an excellent, informative, book about human driver behaviour and the power of thought.

If you don't require drivers to think, they won't think!

[john shepard]

In genevathe roadround the lake is used by cars-going to parking, tourist train, inline skates, bikes, pedestrians, you soon learned to keep careful watch on all traffic. as for comments re:- behaviour when traffic lights fail that is an abnormal situation, A true situation would be when an area was bare normally

[Paddy]

Lived in El Cahon, San Diego County, California for 6 weeks. Many cross roads didn't have traffic lights and all traffic had to stop as no street was of greater importance. First into the junction then had the right to drive on etc. etc. I was amazed at how diciplined and law abiding everyone was. I was the only one to break the rule as I frequently forgot to stop when I saw others stopped on the other junction.

[Anna]

As a pedestrian and motorist I dread the idea of a system where the car driver is automatically assumed to be at fault. I think that what the Dutch have done in that regard is as much to do with admin as safety, though they'd never admit it - it's a lot more work to find and punish a dangerous road user if there is no licence or registration, like with bicycles.
Anyone suggesting car users always be considered at fault has obviously never been overtaken on the left by a cyclist travelling on the pavement who swings out to the right in front of them without indicating, forcing them to brake sharply and risk the car behind crashing into them. They've never seen cyclists routinely ignoring red lights and riding straight into the path of another vehicle which had right of way, with a shaken driver behind the wheel. Hard to believe though it may be, cyclists in my area ride like this all the time, even though they're more at risk than the car drivers. It's got so that I actually comment when, about 4 or 5 times a year, I see a cyclist who rides according to the law for the whole (or most) of the time I can see them.

Some pedestrians also inexplicably take their life in their hands crossing the road without looking at the worst possible times.

I ean, many drivers behave abysmally on the roads, but making them always to blame is just asking for trouble - the cyclists will behave even worse!

[P D Cunningham]

n the US we have 4 way stops, no or few give ways, much slower than back home, and cops ready to give you a ticket if you so much as roll over a slop without FULLY coming to a stop.

[Gavin]

It all sounds great apart from when it's dark and pouring down with rain - even if car drivers are concentrating 100%, this will put pedestrians and cyclists in danger.

[toby]

This is a good first step away from our nanny state. I hope it goes further. As a nation, we base too much of our behaviour on what is legally allowed, disallowed or punishable. This means the individual makes fewer choices, thinks less, shuns responsibility, loses freedom. Go Ashford!

[James]

I once walked across the roundabout around the arc de triomph(unaware of the underpass) at night with a pregnant partner and i'm telling the tale - proves all things can be done. Wouldn't do it sober tho!

[James]

Can you also choose which side of the road you feel like driving on?

[James]

I recall being in a Dublin taxi, which kept going thru red lights. When we asked why, the driver replied he daren't go thru on green cos he might meet his brother coming the other way!

[Alex]

How does a blind person make "eye contact"?

Does their dog do it for them?

[Ted Prangnell]

Well I visited the site this afternoon. It isn't by any means finished yet. I did note that some vehicles were parked on what used to be pavement, and therefore the pedestrian was obliged to walk in the trafficked area.
If it is shared use, then can we have part of it as a one-way street?

There is still a light controlled pedestrian crossing, which leads motorists into thinking that the system is much the same as usual.

Motorists were proceeding fairly quickly this afternoon. They are stipulating a speed limit of 20 mph, when the continentals are; likely to use 20 km p h or less!

The alterations to the Ring Road (converting one-way to 2-way) cost over £14m. Pedestrians are experiencing long delays and some hazards trying to cross thus road. Jay walking is now rife.

Pedestrian and cyclists casualties are 10 times more likely here than in several European countries, where cycling (and walking)is much
common.

We have so much to learn.

[K. Smith]

There are so many simple things can can be done to reduce traffic congestion, but for some reason, in the UK there seems to be no desire to pick up on these ideas.

A number can already be seen to work well in other countries. For example:
- Outside of rush hours, other than for very busy junctions, either turn off traffic lights, or leave them on flashing amber (as in France)
- Turn left on red (as in the USA, but turning right, obviously)
- Use mini roundabouts to replace traffic lights

I can think of instances (Mitcham Road in Croydon being a classic case) where road 'improvements' have created frequent traffic jams where none ever existed before.

Maybe the powers that be are not altogether unhappy with continued traffic congestion.

[Tom]

In US and Canada there are 4 way stops. They are also to be used when lights brake down. They are much more inefficient than lights when intersection gets congested they put lights on it to clean it up. Intelligent light work great as well - no car - its red, car pulls up it switches to let that single car through.

[nik]

the system could work fine if applied to humans,and if humans use it. but as far as england is concerned there are far to many animals driving pretending to be humans,,, warning !!!! sweden, holland and germany contains humans england contains animals- vicious ones, sorry if some animals get offended

[Geoff]

Do they still have speed limits?
if so why?
Every road determines its own limit so why bother.
I assume indicators and lights etc are not required either.
Do everything by eye contact?
What absolute and utter nonsense.
Just give everyone a gun, and the devil take the hindmost.