Can 'naked roads' kill speed?
Discussion
BBC News said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4213221.stm
Can 'naked roads' kill speed?
Can removing kerbs, traffic lights and signs as part of psychological traffic calming measures really work?
Urban planners claim that removing visible road markings, an approach which has been used with some success in Holland, Germany and Sweden, reduces speed and accidents by encouraging drivers to be more considerate to pedestrians.
Traffic lights would be a notable absence from unmarked roads
Reports that the technique could be applied to Exhibition Road in west London, the home of the Science, Natural History and Victoria and Albert museums, have been played down by local authority chiefs. But the idea seems to be gathering steam.
The approach has been tested in Seend, a Wiltshire village, where white lines were removed from the road last April.
Wiltshire County Council said accidents in the village dropped by a third and speed has fallen by an average of 5% after the markings were removed.
It seems to be just a matter of time before other parts of the country try the idea out.
Motoring psychologists and urban planners seem to agree that, overall, "naked roads" appear to have a positive effect on motorists.
Urban design specialist Ben Hamilton-Baillie certainly believes the experiment is effective in calming traffic.
"This approach draws on behavioural psychology involving the way drivers respond to their surroundings," he says.
"It removes the sense of security provided by barriers - such as kerbs, and traffic lights.
"Instead of relying on the street system for security, drivers are forced to use their reactions."
According to Mr Hamilton-Baillie, the removal of a psychological safety net encourages drivers to exercise caution and restraint.
He believes that the lack of clear markings encourages drivers to slow down and mingle with pedestrians, forcing them to make eye contact with one another.
Eye contact
Behavioural psychologists believe this eye contact forces people to communicate non-verbally, reducing the breakdown in understanding that causes accidents.
The urban planner also dismissed the idea that the approach would be less successful in the UK than other European countries.
"A lot of people assume that this system couldn't work in the UK because of aggressive drivers - such as 'white van man' - but there is no reason why it shouldn't work in this country," says Mr Hamilton-Baillie.
"There is a clear link between people's surroundings and their behaviour. If people are in an unpleasant environment, they will behave badly."
This, he suggests, is why driving in London is a notoriously haphazard experience.
Unmarked roads are an alternative to speed humps
The Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), an independent think-tank, has conducted research into various traffic calming measures, including those with a psychological basis.
It has experimented with a number of measures, such as using narrow, winding roads as chicanes and road humps can often prove costly.
According to TRL, perceptual techniques - such as unmarked roads - "have the potential for success".
However, the body believes that more research is needed before the value of such an approach can be clearly established.
Schemes using unmarked roads in mainland Europe have reportedly led to a cut in road accidents.
But not everyone is convinced that "naked roads" are effective in reducing speed and accidents in all circumstances.
Conrad King, RAC Foundation consultant psychologist, agrees that areas which lack markings reduce speeds - but often to the detriment of other streets nearby.
"This system removes key triggers to kid the driver into feeling that he or she is in a pedestrianised zone. If they respond appropriately to the triggers it should remain safe," he says.
But the driving psychologist believes the approach would be dangerous if the start of the 'naked road' zone was not marked properly.
There is a danger that motorists who were unaware of the initiative might use the unmarked stretch of road as a "rat run", unless the start of the area was clearly signposted, said Mr King.
Pressure build-up
He says: "It would probably reduce speed on that particular road but it would, in all likelihood, build pressure on other roads.
"People would slow down on that particular stretch, only to then speed up on other roads to make up for lost time. Consequently, that road might be safer, but overall safety in the area wouldn't necessarily improve."
Mr King believes the approach also focuses on motorists and pedestrians at the expense of other road users.
In the absence of clear markings, and with slower cars, cyclists would speed up on roads, causing conflicts between pedestrians and people on bikes.
The lack of clear markings would also blur the distinction between pavements and roads, making such streets popular with skateboarders and rollerbladers, argues Mr King - raising the potential of minor skirmishes between non-motorist road users.
What do we make of this then? An end to the dreaded speed humps or a novel version of 'The Running Man' in the making?
PetrolTed said:This is all very well when talking about 'us', when I'm on a road with no markings I slow right down, but I don't really think it's people like us who do cause accidents on the roads, more likely to be the average joe who's not really concentrating on what they're doing. Maybe no road markings etc would help focus their concentration a bit but I can see people just treating it as a 'free for all' and anything goes.
I think it's a great idea.
Next time you're on a road with no/few markings, reflect upon your speed.
I find myself driving that bit more slowly through small villages with unmarked roads than I do on roads that have white paint spilled over them by the gallon. It's time that average motorists had to think about things like road position rather than just follow the dotted line and assume everything will be ok.
I may be wrong though (chances are I probably am)
Don said:The traffic lights around here are always dropping out, everything seems to run smoothly, but more often than not there's always at least 1 accident each time they don't work.
Sadly this is what has happened on the "naked" junction at the entrance to our estate...a few rude buggers always have priority...
BBC news said:....yeah, in quiet urban areas, not in city centres.
has been used with some success in Holland, Germany and Sweden
It also seems the policy in these other countries were not so successful (emphasis added)
Ted, I think if Pedestrians followed their own dotted lines, everything would be OK. Don't misunderstand me; I would never condone doing more than 30 on this particular road, but having such a policy on such a road is asking for trouble.
What would happen during the small hours when the driver thinks there are no pedestrians around, but the odd pedestrian used to the 'naked' road thinks the car should be going slow.......
I think there's a degree of sense in this proposal. It will also make pedestrians more aware of cars and make them seek that all-important eye contact. There's nothing like a bit of mutual co-operation between a pedestrian and driver - I hate light controlled pedestrian crossings that remove the need for pedestrians to engage their brain.
I live in a quiet housing estate with a through road. going past my house. After the houses were built for about a year there were no road markings and it gave the impression of it being a quiet leafy suburb, drivers had to think about the separation between themselves and oncoming cars and had to assume that somebody might stick their bonnet out of an unmarked T junction.
Then one day the council finally got around to daubing white paint everywhere and the character of the road changed. It looked like a main road with a helpful white line down the middle and so traffic speed visibly increased to often inappropriate levels.
But the problem is the traffic engineers in this country are generally pretty dim (except it seems the one or two enlightened people who visit Pistonheads) and "naked roads" will undoubtedly be applied to the extreme because it's too hard to consider the middle of the road (no pun intended) strategies.
"Reg"
I live in a quiet housing estate with a through road. going past my house. After the houses were built for about a year there were no road markings and it gave the impression of it being a quiet leafy suburb, drivers had to think about the separation between themselves and oncoming cars and had to assume that somebody might stick their bonnet out of an unmarked T junction.
Then one day the council finally got around to daubing white paint everywhere and the character of the road changed. It looked like a main road with a helpful white line down the middle and so traffic speed visibly increased to often inappropriate levels.
But the problem is the traffic engineers in this country are generally pretty dim (except it seems the one or two enlightened people who visit Pistonheads) and "naked roads" will undoubtedly be applied to the extreme because it's too hard to consider the middle of the road (no pun intended) strategies.
"Reg"
PetrolTed said:
I think it's a great idea.
Next time you're on a road with no/few markings, reflect upon your speed.
I find myself driving that bit more slowly through small villages with unmarked roads than I do on roads that have white paint spilled over them by the gallon. It's time that average motorists had to think about things like road position rather than just follow the dotted line and assume everything will be ok.
Yes, have to agree it sounds like a good plan for the quieter areas. Can't believe many motorists pay much attention to the psychedelic masterpiece most councils seem intent on creating these days.
Although I'm not too sure how the famed Transit Man will respond to it.
Probably with the fitment of a snow plough or similar. 
BliarOut said:
I just don't like the idea of removing the kerbs.... It's not the motorists who are irresponsible, it's the pedestrians 
They're bad enough when they know where they should be, imagine what they'll be like without guidance!
its not the pedestrians who scare me when there isn't a kerb.
its young children. you teach them about the road safety by defining the kerb stone. "you walk over that - mum will smack you". "you run across the road - mum will beat the lving daylights out of you".
if you want to see death traps - check the end of a lot of roads. the pavement continues over the road as the end of the road is augmented with a speed platform.
little kids keeps running - becuase the pavement hasn't run out - splat.
they are dangerously muddying the water about who has priority on a road. is it the big metal object that takes X to stop. or the fleshy humans who bounce off the the big metal objects?
As long as they start to remove the clutter on the roads making it safer for motorcyclists, I'll be happy. On the A614 north of Nottingham, there is a stretch just past the old tip, it's almost impossible to see the hedges as you drive along there, because of all the signage.
There's 100 yard count down boards, Distance signs for Doncaster(!), Junction warning signs, Signs with destinations on, then the blue monitoring cameras, signs for the tip (now closed).
You can't tell me that ALL these signs are needed.
There's 100 yard count down boards, Distance signs for Doncaster(!), Junction warning signs, Signs with destinations on, then the blue monitoring cameras, signs for the tip (now closed).
You can't tell me that ALL these signs are needed.
Didnt this work with quite amazing success in Holland?
After the floods in Banbury the lights in the centre of town were inoperative for a number of weeks.
The result.
No crashes, no traffic it was bliss!
I may be alone in thinking that we could apply the reverse psychology to government though. Anarchy anyone?
After the floods in Banbury the lights in the centre of town were inoperative for a number of weeks.
The result.
No crashes, no traffic it was bliss!
I may be alone in thinking that we could apply the reverse psychology to government though. Anarchy anyone?
mrmaggit said:
As long as they start to remove the clutter on the roads making it safer for motorcyclists, I'll be happy. On the A614 north of Nottingham, there is a stretch just past the old tip, it's almost impossible to see the hedges as you drive along there, because of all the signage.
sorry, but i dont give a stuff about motorcyclists.
they have single handedly wreck two of the best roads in the uk for car users by excessive speeds every weekend.
a large part of the A24 has been made into a 60 zone and the A6 between Matlock and Buxton is a 50 zone.
the A6 running through from Matlock to Cromford has been made into a 40 zone - because motorcyclists kept dismounting at high speed outside the guesthouse my family own!
if you want a road that is safe for motorcyclists - teach them to slow down and teach them not to use my side of the road so that they can overtake a queue of traffic on their side of the road. i don't see why i need to swerve out of the way so a motorcyclist can make good progress at the expense of mine.
tinman0 said:
As long as they start to remove the clutter on the roads making it safer for motorcyclists, I'll be happy. On the A614 north of Nottingham, there is a stretch just past the old tip, it's almost impossible to see the hedges as you drive along there, because of all the signage.
sorry, but i dont give a stuff about motorcyclists.
they have single handedly wreck two of the best roads in the uk for car users by excessive speeds every weekend.
a large part of the A24 has been made into a 60 zone and the A6 between Matlock and Buxton is a 50 zone.
the A6 running through from Matlock to Cromford has been made into a 40 zone - because motorcyclists kept dismounting at high speed outside the guesthouse my family own!
if you want a road that is safe for motorcyclists - teach them to slow down and teach them not to use my side of the road so that they can overtake a queue of traffic on their side of the road. i don't see why i need to swerve out of the way so a motorcyclist can make good progress at the expense of mine.
No need, we can get by quite happily without you moving over
Your arguments don't stack up. You want bikers to slow down so you can speed up?
Sounds like a bad case of envy to me Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff