3 ms·

I sometimes think it would be better to just remove the sidewalk and enforce a low speed restriction on roads. Sidewalks in the UK must cost a fortune, and oft

I sometimes think it would be better to just remove the sidewalk and enforce a low speed restriction on roads. Sidewalks in the UK must cost a fortune, and often the roads without are more attractive (I'm thinking country/village lanes as opposed to motorways) .

jarl 14y ago
The Netherlands has been doing this for decades. In the so-called woonerfs pedestrians and cyclists have priority over motorists. Ideally there are no curbs, signs or road markings, but a very low speed limit is enforced. Kids can play in the middle of the street. Sounds good to me.
michaelochurch 14y ago
In the US we have a weird property of our speed limits. The norm is for them to be under-posted. So a 45 mph road is usually one that you can (and in some circumstances, should) take at 50-55 mph. And on most of those roads, you won't get a ticket for going 5 to 10 mph over the speed limit, because that's the normal speed. There are two problems with this. First, there are a lot of country roads that are properly posted, and the typical 5-10 over is seriously unsafe. I would rather increase speed limits where appropriate and enforce them. Second, in urban areas, the limit is set for reasons not related to road safety, and those reasons are a lot less flexible. 10 mph over the typical urban speed limit (of 25 mph) is the difference between about a 15% chance of killing a pedestrian and a 65% chance. The reality is that people don't respond strongly to posted speed limits. They just aren't enforced often enough for the posted limit to be a major consideration for most drivers. Traffic calming is far more effective (if also controversial).
- roguecoder 14y ago
  I saw a study showing the best way to cut down on pedestrian deaths in residential areas was to eliminate the center line. When cars have to watch out for other cars they slow down and pay more attention.

jarl 14y ago

The Netherlands has been doing this for decades. In the so-called woonerfs pedestrians and cyclists have priority over motorists. Ideally there are no curbs, signs or road markings, but a very low speed limit is enforced. Kids can play in the middle of the street. Sounds good to me.

michaelochurch 14y ago

In the US we have a weird property of our speed limits. The norm is for them to be under-posted. So a 45 mph road is usually one that you can (and in some circumstances, should) take at 50-55 mph. And on most of those roads, you won't get a ticket for going 5 to 10 mph over the speed limit, because that's the normal speed. There are two problems with this. First, there are a lot of country roads that are properly posted, and the typical 5-10 over is seriously unsafe. I would rather increase speed limits where appropriate and enforce them. Second, in urban areas, the limit is set for reasons not related to road safety, and those reasons are a lot less flexible. 10 mph over the typical urban speed limit (of 25 mph) is the difference between about a 15% chance of killing a pedestrian and a 65% chance. The reality is that people don't respond strongly to posted speed limits. They just aren't enforced often enough for the posted limit to be a major consideration for most drivers. Traffic calming is far more effective (if also controversial).

roguecoder 14y ago
I saw a study showing the best way to cut down on pedestrian deaths in residential areas was to eliminate the center line. When cars have to watch out for other cars they slow down and pay more attention.