Investigating spatial behaviour in different types of shared space

Abstract

The shared space concept has been implemented in many European cities to promote barrier-free movement and encourage road users to rely on social behaviour and mutual respect. By minimising traffic control and reducing segregation between traffic modes, it attempts to enhance the role of pedestrians in the space. Yet, shared space design is context-based, relying on local policies, cultural behaviour and the use of different design elements. There is a wide variety of schemes and, due to the complexity of modelling social behaviour in shared spaces, it is still a challenge to analyse the impact of different designs on traffic behaviour. Therefore, investigating existing implementations can be useful to illustrate the potential effect of a certain design approach. In this paper, road users’ trajectories from different types of shared space schemes are analysed and compared in regard to spatial behaviour. For that, five schemes in Germany were selected and recorded. The results indicate that cyclists and motor vehicles move with comparable speeds and mostly follow similar trajectories in the case study areas. However, to avoid conflicts, cyclists might choose to ride on the edges of the circulation zone or seek refuge in the safe zone. Some patterns of pedestrian movement were observed in similar schemes. Pedestrians are more likely to walk in the circulation zone in shared space intersections than in street segments. Nevertheless, this comparative analysis has shown that pedestrian movement is still diverse and hard to predict solely on the design. Even though the shared space design influences how people use the space, the presence of motor vehicles might have a stronger impact on spatial behaviour and should be better explored in future research. In practice, implementing the shared space concept does not necessarily create a balance in space usage or behaviour. It is crucial to integrate design elements and policies to better accommodate the needs of vulnerable road users.