No Traffic Signs, Lights - Shared Spaces

[iacas]

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

Yeah, I know how to drive too.

I'm talking about the shared space examples in the video in your OP.

There are still laws. @saevel25 pointed this out. As did I.

[saevel25]

There are plenty of examples were laws are known, but not signed for. 

Example, states have required speed limits depending on the type of road and the location of the road. If you are in an un-signed rural road in Ohio, there is a speed limit. 

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.21

Another example, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in a sidewalk at a signalized intersection. Very rarely will that be signed. It may become signed depending on cases and complaints. 

I would never assume this type of traffic design is with out laws governing it. 

[David in FL]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

There are still laws. @saevel25 pointed this out. As did I.

That's not how I understand the video you posted.  

In fact, it clearly shows a hodgepodge of traffic that doesn't follow the laws as they exist now.

 

2 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

There are plenty of examples were laws are known, but not signed for. 

Example, states have required speed limits depending on the type of road and the location of the road. If you are in an un-signed rural road in Ohio, there is a speed limit. 

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.21

Another example, drivers are required to yield to pedestrians in a sidewalk at a signalized intersection. Very rarely will that be signed. It may become signed depending on cases and complaints. 

I would never assume this type of traffic design is with out laws governing it. 

You're missing the point.  The shared space concept, at least as explained in the OP video relies on everyone to just kind of go where they want, in the hope that they'll do the right thing.

Again, I'm only reacting to the video.

 Fwiw though, I've personally experienced similar uncontrolled intersections in China and found it to be confusing and unnerving.

[Golfingdad]

On 11/25/2017 at 2:56 PM, jsgolfer said:

Unfortunately it is actually a very good idea, not a joke at all.  It makes perfect engineering sense.  Hans Monderman, came up with this back in 2004.  I'm totally in his camp, that we as drivers are bombarded with too many sensory objects on our roads.  We drive to the signs, not to what is going on around us while we are driving.   

https://www.wired.com/2004/12/traffic/

"A wide road with a lot of signs is… saying, go ahead, don’t worry, go as fast as you want, there’s no need to pay attention to your surroundings. And that’s a very dangerous message.”

“When you treat people like idiots, they’ll behave like idiots.”

And we have a lot of idiot drivers in America becasue of it.

I agree with you on this.  Great, innovative idea that certainly has its places.

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, David in FL said:

You're missing the point.

He's not. It was his job for a decade or so.

Traffic laws still exist and if there was an accident they'd be applied.

Just like when the power goes out and people have to get through an intersection without a stop light.

[David in FL]

Just now, iacas said:

He's not. It was his job for a decade or so.

Traffic laws still exist and if there was an accident they'd be applied.

What does his job have to do with whether he understood my point or not?  

I'm reacting to your unique video.  I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad idea, I just have questions that aren't answered by the video.

 

 

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, David in FL said:

What does his job have to do with whether he understood my point or not?  

I'm reacting to your unique video.  I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad idea, I just have questions that aren't answered by the video.

Asked and answered multiple times. Laws still exist.

[saevel25]

15 minutes ago, David in FL said:

 The shared space concept, at least as explained in the OP video relies on everyone to just kind of go where they want, in the hope that they'll do the right thing.

Not necessarily. 

There are a few things to consider from looking at the video,

1. They still drive on the left side of the road until they are able to get to a point to negotiate the traffic movement they want. This is not mayhem as what you are describing. 

2. Most traffic control is based on signs and signals. Yet, their are still underlying laws regulating speed limits, yielding to other vehicles and pedestrians, which may or may not be signed to begin with. 

3. In the first intersection shown in the video, the one in England, the traffic engineers did something very sneaky. They used different colors, and created a central circle. This in turn creates a contrast for the driver to know not to drive over it. It's very similar to a roundabout concept. You can have a roundabout designed to have a drivable center median or non-drivable. This one is a drivable one, but the roundabout concept is still there. This makes the driver want to go around the center circle.

4. There could still be laws dictating yielding to pedestrians. These laws are also routinely not signed anyways. 

28 minutes ago, David in FL said:

Fwiw though, I've personally experienced similar uncontrolled intersections in China and found it to be confusing and unnerving.

Of course you were, you are from the USA. You didn't grow up in China. I do not find your opinion on this shocking since you are someone who has grown up in the US System of traffic control. 

Should the concept be studied more, sure. They made a great point about accessibility for disabled people. The shared space concept has a lot of pluses if used in the right setting. 

[David in FL]

I think the last point is absolutely true.  It has to be the right setting...

[colin007]

13 hours ago, David in FL said:

I hope you didn't pay money for that class!    

Of course there is.  Just run a red light and hit someone who had a green light to find the consequences of violating that particular law.

Maybe it's just semantics, but I found this quote from driversed.com

Right-of-way

Right-of-way rules help people drive safely. These rules go along with courtesy and common sense. Bicycle riders, moped riders, and pedestrians must follow these rules, too.

Never insist on taking the right-of-way. Note that the law does not allow anyone the right-of-way. It only states who must yield. When a driver is legally required to yield the right-of-way but fails to do so, other drivers are required to stop or yield as necessary for safety. So, if another driver does not yield to you when he or she should, forget it. Let the other driver go first. You will help prevent accidents and make driving more pleasant.

[David in FL]

25 minutes ago, colin007 said:

Maybe it's just semantics, but I found this quote from driversed.com

Right-of-way

Right-of-way rules help people drive safely. These rules go along with courtesy and common sense. Bicycle riders, moped riders, and pedestrians must follow these rules, too.

Never insist on taking the right-of-way. Note that the law does not allow anyone the right-of-way. It only states who must yield. When a driver is legally required to yield the right-of-way but fails to do so, other drivers are required to stop or yield as necessary for safety. So, if another driver does not yield to you when he or she should, forget it. Let the other driver go first. You will help prevent accidents and make driving more pleasant.

That doesn't mean that there aren't rules/laws determining right-of-way, just that if someone violates those laws, you're better off to not force the issue and risk an accident and/or injury if it's in your power to do so.

If someone points a gun at me and demands my wallet, most will recommend that I give it to him too.  That doesn't mean that there aren't laws against armed robbery.

I can't argue with either one!  

[nevets88]

So this is happening throughout the world. The opposite of shared spaces. Tactical urbanism. Locals take initiative and redraw the streets, safety benefits realized, changes made by government. There are many ways to make streets safer, each case needs to be examined individually, and the more tools in the toolbox, shared space, tactical urbanism, the better. In this case, less room calms down traffic, gives people less road to cross, crossing faster/safer.

 

[Lihu]

On 11/24/2017 at 7:10 PM, iacas said:

What do you think?

I think of the intersections in major cities in China. Talk about shared space, there is no sense of direction either. You even have vehicles that are patched up from thrown away farm machinery. 

[rehmwa]

In theory, I love the idea.

In practice......I just think of all the pedestrians and drivers today that I see on their cellphones......As well as the reckless speeders I see already in residential areas.

[iacas]

11 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

In theory, I love the idea.

In practice......I just think of all the pedestrians and drivers today that I see on their cellphones......As well as the reckless speeders I see already in residential areas.

Did you read the article above? The signs may give these people on their cell phones a sense of complacency. So they focus on other things. If they don't have that sense of complacency, they'll pay attention to the traffic.

You don't see people on their cell phones at stop lights when the power has gone out. They're all paying attention and working out what to do, when to go, who to wave to, etc.

[rehmwa]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Did you read the article above? The signs may give these people on their cell phones a sense of complacency. So they focus on other things. If they don't have that sense of complacency, they'll pay attention to the traffic.

You don't see people on their cell phones at stop lights when the power has gone out. They're all paying attention and working out what to do, when to go, who to wave to, etc.

I hear that, I'm not completely believing it though.

I do see them on cell phones even when traffic is dicey.  It's getting worse - or I'm getting more observant.

As I said - I really like the theory.  I'd hope it works.  Traffic lights are horrible things for flow.  I'd likely give this concept the benefit of the doubt more than my cynical doubt.