5 ms·
I think you're talking about something else, because we should be designing for pedestrians to not be hit by cars, not making sure that pedestrians might surviv
by oconnore 10y ago
I think you're talking about something else, because we should be designing for pedestrians to not be hit by cars, not making sure that pedestrians might survive the impact. At the same time, limiting modern cars to 25 mph everywhere is ridiculous.
In some high density locations, that might mean strictly enforcing a 15mph limit instead of loosely enforcing a 10mph limit, building bike lanes, public transport, pedestrian bridges, and guarded crosswalks, etc.
- revelation 10y agoI'm sure we can do both. It was you who suggested being lenient on people going 35-40 mph in a 30 zone; 30 suggests the likelihood of encountering pedestrians, hence the mention of the survival rate. I'm quite with you on what we can do in high density locations, but I think you have not quite thought it through. In high density locations, there should simply not be any cars. The huge compromises are not justified where pedestrians outnumber them 5:1 anyways.
- closeparen 10y agoLet's be clear that what you're saying is, "In high density locations, there shouldn't be anyone who won't pay the rent to live within walking distance."