Cross with caution

A few months ago I was at an Urban Design Group meeting where someone raised the issue of the proliferation of traffic lights in England over recent years. This was in the context of a discussion about Woonerven, home zones, and methods (pioneered principally by Dutch road engineers such as Hans Monderman) of promoting deliberately ambiguous public space around and on roadways.

Traffic lights infer an unambiguously binary feel to the use of roads: stop, go, stop, go. I have priority, you have priority. But because I’m stopped when I want to go, I feel disempowered and frustrated. Because the lights are there, in the high street, I’m disinclined to cross the road. And because the traffic’s there between us, I don’t see my neighbour passing on the other side, I see no-one.

Just lately I’ve noticed some examples where traffic lights have been placed at junctions but are not operational – simply left with orange bags on their heads like some kind of postmodern window display. And in some cases, they’ve been there like that for some time. I suspect we have here some examples of what’s been called second generation traffic calming. Watch what happens when drivers and pedestrians get to the crossing at about the same time: neither is sure if it’s an official crossing, they slow down, they negotiate occupation of the crossing, often with eye contact. It’s almost human. Both driver and pedestrian probably feel just fractionally less controlled, more responsible for having taken notice of other members of the species. More please.

For some good stuff about second generation traffic calming see some of David Engwicht’s material at Less Traffic – in particular, What is second generation traffic calming?