3 ms·

There is a real difference, in both actual safety and perceived safety, between divided roads and undivided roads with the same number of lanes. Wider lanes se

There is a real difference, in both actual safety and perceived safety, between divided roads and undivided roads with the same number of lanes. Wider lanes seem (and are) safer than narrower lanes. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_calming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_calming for more. Reasonable drivers conform their driving habits to the environment. Unreasonable drivers should not be allowed to drive.

waterhouse 6y ago
> There is a real difference, in both actual safety and perceived safety, between divided roads and undivided roads ... Wider lanes seem (and are) safer than narrower lanes. > [Wiki] Traffic calming can include the following engineering measures ... Narrowing traffic lanes ... Converting one-way streets into two-way streets forces opposing traffic into close proximity, which requires more careful driving What is happening here? Did the engineers forget that they were supposed to optimize for safety, and instead optimized for getting people to slow down? Does the net effect of this improve safety, or worsen it? If everyone drives as fast as they can while meeting some perceived safety level, then does that mean these efforts are unlikely to affect safety and merely to slow everyone down? Is the best set of measures the maximally deceptive set, which looks as dangerous as possible while being as safe as possible?
- lazyasciiart 6y ago
  > If everyone drives as fast as they can while meeting some perceived safety level, then does that mean these efforts are unlikely to affect safety and merely to slow everyone down? No. It means that people are usually wrong when they judge the safety level of their driving speed on a nice clear road that happens to have pedestrians next to it or trying to cross it, but are more accurate at judging safety when they are primed to expect obstacles, steering challenges, other actors moving not in parallel with them on the road itself. https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/traffic-calming/ https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/traffic-calming/

waterhouse 6y ago

> There is a real difference, in both actual safety and perceived safety, between divided roads and undivided roads ... Wider lanes seem (and are) safer than narrower lanes. > [Wiki] Traffic calming can include the following engineering measures ... Narrowing traffic lanes ... Converting one-way streets into two-way streets forces opposing traffic into close proximity, which requires more careful driving What is happening here? Did the engineers forget that they were supposed to optimize for safety, and instead optimized for getting people to slow down? Does the net effect of this improve safety, or worsen it? If everyone drives as fast as they can while meeting some perceived safety level, then does that mean these efforts are unlikely to affect safety and merely to slow everyone down? Is the best set of measures the maximally deceptive set, which looks as dangerous as possible while being as safe as possible?

lazyasciiart 6y ago
> If everyone drives as fast as they can while meeting some perceived safety level, then does that mean these efforts are unlikely to affect safety and merely to slow everyone down? No. It means that people are usually wrong when they judge the safety level of their driving speed on a nice clear road that happens to have pedestrians next to it or trying to cross it, but are more accurate at judging safety when they are primed to expect obstacles, steering challenges, other actors moving not in parallel with them on the road itself. https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/traffic-calming/ https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/traffic-calming/