http://www.boingboing.net/2004/06/18/everything_we_know_a.html

Everything we know about traffic-calming is wrong

Mind-blowing article about the European and Chinese challenges to the
received wisdom on traffic planning and calming, arguing that the
separation of peds and cars leads to less-safe streets:

"The more you post the evidence of legislative control, such as
traffic signs, the less the driver is trying to use his or her own
senses," says Hamilton-Baillie, noting he has a habit of walking
randomly across roads -- much to his wife's consternation. "So the
less you can advertise the presence of the state in terms of
authority, the more effective this approach can be." This, of course,
is the exact opposite of the "Triple E" traffic-calming approach,
which seeks to control the driver through the use of speed bumps,
photo radar, crosswalks and other engineering and enforcement
mechanisms.

The "self-reading street" has its roots in the Dutch "woonerf" design
principles that emerged in the 1970s. Blurring the boundary between
street and sidewalk, woonerfs combine innovative paving, landscaping
and other urban designs to allow for the integration of multiple
functions in a single street, so that pedestrians, cyclists and
children playing share the road with slow-moving cars. The pilot
projects were so successful in fostering better urban environments
that the ideas spread rapidly to Belgium, France, Denmark and Germany.
In 1998, the British government adopted a "Home Zones" initiative --
the woonerf equivalent -- as part of its national transportation
policy.

"What the early woonerf principles realized," says Hamilton-Baillie,
"was that there was a two-way interaction between people and traffic.
It was a vicious or, rather, a virtuous circle: The busier the streets
are, the safer they become. So once you drive people off the street,
they become less safe."

Salon Link (Reg/Ads Req'd) (via Kottke)

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/05/20/traffic_design/

Why don't we do it in the road?

A new school of traffic design says we should get rid of stop signs
and red lights and let cars, bikes and people mingle together. It
sounds insane, but it works.

May 20, 2004 | It's rush hour, and I am standing at the corner of
Zhuhui and Renmin Road, a four-lane intersection in Suzhou, China.
Ignoring the red light, a couple of taxis and a dozen bicycles are
headed straight for a huge mass of cyclists, cars, pedicabs and mopeds
that are turning left in front of me. Cringing, I anticipate a
collision. Like a flock of migrating birds, however, the mass changes
formation. A space opens up, the taxis and bicycles move in, and
hundreds of commuters continue down the street, unperturbed and
fatality free.

In Suzhou, the traffic rules are simple. "There are no rules," as one
local told me. A city of 2.2 million people, Suzhou has 500,000 cars
and 900,000 bicycles, not to mention hundreds of pedicabs, mopeds and
assorted, quainter forms of transportation. Drivers of all modes pay
little attention to the few traffic signals and weave wildly from one
side of the street to another. Defying survival instincts, pedestrians
have to barge between oncoming cars to cross the roads.

But here's the catch: During the 10 days I spent in Suzhou last fall,
I didn't see a single accident. Really, not a single one. Nor was
there any of the road rage one might expect given the anarchy that
passes for traffic policy. And despite the obvious advantages that
accrue to cars because of their size, no single transportation mode
dominates the streets. On the contrary, the urban arterials are a
communal mix of automobiles, cyclists, pedestrians, and small
businesses such as inner-tube repairmen that set up shop directly in
the right-of-way.


[...]

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 21:29:44 +0100, Marc Brett
wrote in message
:

Mind-blowing article about the European and Chinese challenges to the
received wisdom on traffic planning and calming, arguing that the
separation of peds and cars leads to less-safe streets:

Now that really /is/ new. Unless you've read JS Dean's 1946 book
"Murder Most Foul". Or Bob Davis' "Death On The Streets". Or Mayer
Hillman's "One False Move".

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Marc Brett wrote:
The pilot
projects were so successful in fostering better urban environments
that the ideas spread rapidly to Belgium, France

France? Traffic Calming... I guess the author has never been to France.

David Off wrote:

France? Traffic Calming... I guess the author has never been to France.

They calm their drivers with a bottle of vin rouge ;-)

Tony

"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...
David Off wrote:

France? Traffic Calming... I guess the author has never been to France.

They calm their drivers with a bottle of vin rouge ;-)

Tony


This reminds me of something I saw on the Discovery channel once.

Bascially, they took one one driver, and tested him on a private track.

They found him to be aggressive, selfish, and unwill to acknowledge his
limitations

They then gave him a joint to smoke, and repeated the test.

His driving improved - the theory being that the cannabis, whilst limiting
his ability to drive, made him more relaxed and made him more aware of his
limitations.

Obviously (and as was pointed out in the programme), this doesn't mean
driving while stoned should be legal, but it was an interesting, if
unexpected result - and certainly worthy of more investigation.

Thought I'd just throw that in for the sake of conversation :-)

"Marc Brett" wrote in message
...

http://www.boingboing.net/2004/06/18/everything_we_know_a.html

Everything we know about traffic-calming is wrong

Mind-blowing article about the European and Chinese challenges to
the
received wisdom on traffic planning and calming, arguing that the
separation of peds and cars leads to less-safe streets:

snipped

Recently in Orkney, did some driving around the main street of
Stromness. Very narrow, 2-way traffic and pedestrians mingling,
standing in doorways to let cars past, etc. I paid a lot of attention
and initially found it daunting to drive, but soon realised it was one
of the safest non-pedestrianised "main streets" I ever experienced.
Locals found it second nature to look both ways before stepping out of
shop doorways. Likewise drivers patiently waited for pedestrians to go
about their business. It all seemed to work quite well. The only
"traffic control" measures there were single yellow lines to
discourage long-term obstructions.
In short, because of higher perceived danger levels, much more
caution is exercised, and a street ends up being safer.





.................................................. ...............
Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
at http://www.TitanNews.com
-=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Nathaniel Porter wrote:
"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...
David Off wrote:

France? Traffic Calming... I guess the author has never been to
France.

They calm their drivers with a bottle of vin rouge ;-)

Tony


This reminds me of something I saw on the Discovery channel once.

Bascially, they took one one driver, and tested him on a private
track.

They found him to be aggressive, selfish, and unwill to acknowledge
his limitations

They then gave him a joint to smoke, and repeated the test.

His driving improved - the theory being that the cannabis, whilst
limiting his ability to drive, made him more relaxed and made him
more aware of his limitations.

Obviously (and as was pointed out in the programme), this doesn't mean
driving while stoned should be legal, but it was an interesting, if
unexpected result - and certainly worthy of more investigation.

Thought I'd just throw that in for the sake of conversation :-)

Dope messes with your perception of speed, smoke enough and try to drive and
the cops will pull you over for doing 10 mph on a clear road.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK


Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

AndyMorris wrote:

Dope messes with your perception of speed, smoke enough and try to drive and
the cops will pull you over for doing 10 mph on a clear road.

Sounds like that might have been personal experience there ;-)

Tony

"AndyMorris" wrote in message
...
Nathaniel Porter wrote:
"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...
David Off wrote:

France? Traffic Calming... I guess the author has never been to
France.

They calm their drivers with a bottle of vin rouge ;-)

Tony


This reminds me of something I saw on the Discovery channel once.

Bascially, they took one one driver, and tested him on a private
track.

They found him to be aggressive, selfish, and unwill to acknowledge
his limitations

They then gave him a joint to smoke, and repeated the test.

His driving improved - the theory being that the cannabis, whilst
limiting his ability to drive, made him more relaxed and made him
more aware of his limitations.

Obviously (and as was pointed out in the programme), this doesn't mean
driving while stoned should be legal, but it was an interesting, if
unexpected result - and certainly worthy of more investigation.

Thought I'd just throw that in for the sake of conversation :-)

Dope messes with your perception of speed, smoke enough and try to drive
and
the cops will pull you over for doing 10 mph on a clear road.


Which is what you'd expect - but this didn't happen in the (obviously
relatively unscientific) experiment shown above. What did happen was he
drove slowly (but not that slowly), and was so paranoid about hitting
anything or messing up (which is one of the effects of dope) that he
actually drove carefully and did manage to spot all the hazards thrown at
him, and he dealt with them well.

Just to reiterate, I'm not meaning to say that driving while stoned should
be legal - but as I say the results of this experiment were rather
unexpected and most interesting :-)

Nathaniel Porter wrote:

Which is what you'd expect - but this didn't happen in the (obviously
relatively unscientific) experiment shown above. What did happen was he
drove slowly (but not that slowly), and was so paranoid about hitting
anything or messing up (which is one of the effects of dope) that he
actually drove carefully and did manage to spot all the hazards thrown at
him, and he dealt with them well.

Just to reiterate, I'm not meaning to say that driving while stoned should
be legal - but as I say the results of this experiment were rather
unexpected and most interesting :-)

{Puff} Like yeah man {puff}

Tony ;-)