It's amazing that I didn't even consider how this would effect people with disabilities until they brought it up, it really does highlight how important it is to consult and consider everyone when designing public spaces
They must have thought about it before commencing the project right? It’s one thing to forget about it during a 5 minute video where you’ve never given it thought. It’s another thing to plan for months and months and not consider it
@@realitities2 you overestimate the human specie and give evidence of how it could fail all in a simple comment. what do you think happen when there is many people working on a project? people split task and things like this can often end in the hand of only one person or multiple that aren't trying to hard and just bank on the fact that the others will put in the work of thinking about everything. oversight are really easy.
It's the reason why these are prototype streets. They made them to test their effectiveness, and they happen to be far more effective. 1 issue per year, as opposed to 36, is worth sacrificing 1 blind person. Sure, that's controversial, but the end result is still better. What is 1 life against 35? And it could have just been chance. It's not like blind people _never_ get hit in normal crossings. Maybe that case just happened to be in that space. There were still _able_ people who got hurt in them too. 1 blind guy gets hit and people make a big deal of it, but half-a-dozen able people get hit and nobody even flinches. Blind people aren't more valuable than others. Vice versa, too. The cases are lower, period. They are better than normal crossings.
I guess it works because it’s 1 strange and 2 people are taught how to behave by other junctions, those with traffic lights, and the tickets they can get by misbehaving there and they copy their habits and fears into these shared spaces. It wouldn’t work in some Kazakhstan or India where people drive like mad
@@gaabsmrr hey dude, india people drive sensibly and slower than usa. And first of all we don't have traffic lights except at heavy traffic roads. Some intersections do get quite busy, but they function as shared spaces. There hasn't been a single accident near me.
The shared space in Ashford is much larger than just Elwick Square, most of the shots and clips are from Ashford on this video. I can safely say that drivers do not slow down on that road
Junior Jaw that street you mentioning is 14 lanes wide with mid level traffic and pedestrains are crossing the road at the next traffic guided junction. This doesnt prove it works on heavy traffic
They wouldn't be good for placed where traffic is assumed to be fast, like the outskirts of towns, but in the medium borders of city centers, they could help serve as a cue to start slowing down or find a place to park before entering the pedestrian dominant urban core. For disabled or blind people, we need to have bumps to at least separate sidewalks from dangerous drivers and crosswalk signals to buy time for slower pedestrians.
I wonder if this lower numbers of accidents are because of novelty? Maybe if people start to get more comfortable with this, they might start to speed.
Only works for so long though. When people see it more they'll find ways to efficiently navigate to the detriment and possible demise of pedestrians. It's only sort of safe because it's currently unfamiliar.
Hmmm, should we listen to some random guy on TH-cam applying his "common sense" thinking to something he just learned about on a video, or should we listen to the people who design and carefully study these systems? Tough choice.
@@jmckendry84 as a traffic engineer, id just like to mention that "traffic studies" are the most non-scientific, smallest sample sizing, false model dependent, often outdated, and often contradicting "studies" that youve ever seen, held together with bubblegum and duct tape.
The Menthologist I agree because iirc when Sweden switched from the left to the right side of the road people were much more careful and accidents plummeted but rose back up as they got used to it
Two points: Years ago my city experienced a blackout for the better part of a day and I noticed drivers automatically treated every intersection like a 4-way stop. And, the current system in America assumes all streets and roads are for cars, therefore most drivers resent any accommodation for pedestrians, bikes, skateboards or even trucks, as if they have no right to be there.
Glad people where you live know what to do when traffic lights go out. Where I live people don't treat them as 4 way stops. Its just go when you feel like it.
Exactly, shared spaces work well in areas with high pedestrian traffic and low vehicle traffic. Pedestrians get more pavement space (which can be very limited, especially in the UK) and cars have to slow down. Seems a bit like a stopgap before complete pedestrianisation.
You don't need to experiment with it, just go to Egypt, it's been like that for all of history. There are street signs but they're completely ignored. I fear for my life every time I cross the street
In places where there has always been a lack of what is traditional urban street design in the west means this type of shared space design is not new. It's lack of newness means it will not make anyone uncomfortable, and thus will not slow down. If anything, the traditional western street design successfully implemented in places like Egypt is what would slow people down. Because it would be new and unfamiliar.
Those shared spaces are not designed as per the given principles. Most likely you are talking about roads that were built without any guiding oversight or plan, just like roads that are built at the outskirts of an expanding city. I live in India and I see both of these designs (Planned and Unplanned Shared Spaces), and trust me, the Planned shared spaces are much better than the ones that are just unplanned
yes bro , I would like to know if driving like this a nature talent or you adapt it afterwards ? and can the skill be exported to other country ? because the indian people in my country drive like this too
When we have the occasional power outage here, it's amazing how everyone cooperates safely at intersections (when the street lights are out). Like the video says, everyone slows down, is patient, and makes eye contact. Kind of a similar concept.
LA Fresh Life Whoa that is an *excellent* analogy, and so true. As a pedestrian, when there are no/non-working traffic lights, the drivers will make eye contact and wave me on to cross the street. Also, the cars will progress the same direction a pedestrian is crossing, then switch sides. It may look convoluted, but it seems to work in theory. Aside from the visualy impared people who might not be able to see the hand waving gesture to pass or incoming cars.
agreed, but I've always wondered if that power outage attitude would actually remain if the power wasn't fixed, or if it's just happening because of the novelty of it
But depending on where the power outage occurs, it also causes a massive amount of traffic congestion that can last for hours. Which is why this shared space stuff can only be useful in small towns at best.
hmm I'm thinking, but after people are used to it, natural patterns will start to occur, such as cars travelling in groups & then a break while another road's group goes through, but if that was to happen, while traffic could end up comparable to regular lights based intersections, or even slightly better like the video claims, the flip side of that is you'd start to see the sort of thing you currently see at lights, where people speed up to get through the light changing to red & as soon as that happens, all the claimed increased safety from this goes out the window & it becomes biggest/heaviest wins
Shared spaces only work short term, in the long run, people will get used to the designs and stop being cautious, increasing speed and acting recklessly with no signs or lights to regulate movement, accidents will start to become more and more common. In countries like the US especially, this wouldn't work period. American roads are just way too big and the US has far more drivers. There are other ways of increasing road/car safety that are much more effective.
We already have something similar to shared spaces in residential neighborhoods, where there often aren't signs at intersections. We don't have an increased consciousness at these intersections, because we're used to them. I know from experience that I very often make incorrect assumptions at these. Also, the only way that shared spaces can work is if everyone understands the same mores (such as right of way) when crossing through the space. When I'm in other countries, I _need_ road signs in order to figure out what to do in certain circumstances, since the rules of the road aren't always the same as in the U.S.
I guess such system promotes defensive driving and that you have to give to get in return. What many people fail to recognize is that driving is like a language. You have to hear when somebody's talking and vice versa. From my experience, both systems are good, you just have to have drivers that are willing to accept change. Change is troublesome
That's exactly how you drive in India. Elsewhere in the world, honking is considered aggressive. In India, honking is like waving a Hi, a form of communication that horns are made for, horns are not made for swearing.
This is based on the assumption that drivers are going to be civil. Try spending some time in Vietnam where rules exist, but aren't followed. It is essentially this system that is being advocated. It doesn't work so well. Its effectiveness depends entirely on the culture it is placed in. IN England, they will be civil with and without traffic signs. In Vietnam, they won't be civil with or without traffic signs.
Shared space only works if you still have roads with normal rules. Otherwise having no signs would be the norm and people would start to drive carelessly on shared space roads like people do now on normal roads
I don't know, I'm split for and against this. In New York, USA city of Manhattan, this is normal especially hot spots like Times Square. They have cross walks and traffic lights like all other cities but everyone just crossed AFTER the car passed them, and cyclist give no f's. Yet in Las Vegas, USA there are overpasses, wide cross walks that hover over the traffic. So all the pedestrians and cyclist (rare) would be up there and cars below.
John Karavitis Well you Right India 🇮🇳 doesn’t have any traffic system, Actually Indians hate systems 😆 they are normal people and never put their head in those things, I can they are spiritual and simple Livers, Systems force them to do something that they don’t want to do, so I say Indian don’t have traffic system like west have BUT people are still surviving And living just like a western, Both countries have countless road accidents every year.
This is an interesting idea and could probably work in some European countries or small towns, but the problem is you have to hope that everyone on the road is a rational, reasonable, and reliable human being that won't speed up in the middle of all this because the person in front of them is "going to slow" and try to cut them off, in big citys like LA, New York, Chicago, Miami, Seattle, etcc. I just don't see this being a thing.
Yeah. In Malaysia, you see a lot of those people everywhere. Most of them drive as if they wanted to be Kamikazes themselves. Crass, rude and suicidal. And these same people would scratch their heads as to why they ended up in a hospital with a broken limb, if they were unfortunate enough.
Exactly, the way American roads are designed (large intersections often allowing very high speeds), this would just be very impractical and extremely dangerous. Perhaps in certain downtown areas this would work but definitely not widespread
Yea come to India. I'll wire a million bucks if you cross the shared space safely and quickly, and another million if the vehicles wait for a pedestrian
Demagogue was used in this video: in 3:55 it's said that "accidents drop from 36 in four years to 1 in a year"" This leaves the listener with the rate 36 to1', instead of the real numbers of 8 to 1
yoav tamir they say it like that because more than likely there were anomalies such as 16 In 1 year or something and just used the other 3 to average it out
it is bad use of statitstics but not overly bad and probably justified because there is not enough data on the new system which is in place for a year or two. One thing to note is that if there is big change in the rules people tend to be more careful that would worry me about those statistics a lot.
The 4 million said in the video was spend on the entite towns infrastructure not only this shared space I believe. Still expensive but not as worse as it first looks
I feel like this isn't too much of a step from roundabouts, just go slow and be aware of your surroundings, then if someone steps onto the road by accident it's quicker to stop, and also a faster flow of traffic rather than waiting at a red light when it's clear.
but roundabouts still have rules and no pedestrians are on them. This is a free for all and I see it being incredibly dangerous especially from a driver's perspective.
True, but it's just one step away. I've been on roundabouts with four or five exits and a zebra crossing at each exit. You have to be aware of your surrounds all the time on it, and for a short period of time (the time it takes you to drive through the intersection) that's perfectly fine. Also I think drivers will instinctively give way to the right as you can see a small 'hump' in the middle of the area, having learnt and spent time on roundabouts it'd be a pretty easy transition.
this is still not a solution for people who are blind and visually impaired. Roundabout are very hard to cross when you can't see and they don't build them with the ap!propriate devices to help (audibles).
that is not enough blind people depend on s traffic surge and the sound that the traffic makes and in addition the noise ( audible pedestrian signal) too help them. With the traffic going the same direction they are they are unable to cross.
Roundabouts actually decrease safety for pedestrians. Why? Because driver want to be on circle thus he accelerate fast and don't look for pedestrians. And when driver want to exit circle driver also don't look for pedestrians to execute maneuver as fast as it's possible. Shared spaces work at least in Europe because it's not uncommon in most places for people to be everywhere and roads to be shared, for well as long cars exist. Also if driver hit anybody especially on shared space it's driver problem and there is no excuse.
We have this in India, pretty much every place is a "shared place" where pedestrians can cross the road freely and cars driver super slowly. The cars drive super slow because of traffic and the pedestrians cross the road freely because they aren't any crosswalks
youfoundisaac Oh, have you been here before, where roads are designed to be fast in the South, and where pedistrians abuse their right of way when crossing the street? Where in California, a driver's license is nicknamed the killing license because the driving test is a joke? Where drivers in the city are rude and don't know of this thing called a turn signal? Where the car traffic is high? And why don't you imagine this working in India, or a Third World country? No body thinks it's a good idea, and they slug it through there. Look at that bloody traffic.
We have these but they're in neighborhoods, notice how there's no stop signs at intersections in neighborhoods? The driver is supposed to assume the right-of-way when approaching the intersection.
It’s a horrible idea all you have to do is look at India and Philippines and appreciate traffic light that’s why traffic law were made accident were common back then
Brennen Rivera not really there is a large difference between situations like that and these ones. People in countries like india and the philippines dont tend to follow road laws as much.
I don't think there is any point to change any of this considering that self-automated cars are not very far off from the future. Automated cars are extremely safe even though humans don't "feel" safe. Watch CGP Grey's video th-cam.com/video/iHzzSao6ypE/w-d-xo.html
Is there a study that shows the same effect for a reverse change? I mean, is there a place where there has always been a shared space and there were little accidents and then the traffic lights were installed and suddenly the accidents rate increased? (One should be careful to choose a place where the traffic lights were installed not because of a sharp rise of traffic because then the rise in accidents wouldn’t be due to traffic lights but the higher traffic itself)
It definitely seems reasonable to say that because shared spaces are safer overall, learning how to incorporate disabled bodies into the design before implementing them would be the best step forward.
The "disabled question" seems like a no-brainer to me: you just make sure there is a way to alert everyone that a disabled person is crossing, whether that's their aide, or some button that activates special lights or whatever. Since they are a tiny minority, having a special, unique measure in place for them seems like the most perfectly appropriate response.
The point is to increase people stress levels and force them to use their senses and interact with one another. If a blind person needs to cross, a stranger will assist them. If not, they must be forced to use their other senses, adapt and survive. It's what humans do best. Holding their hands and treating them like useless babies doesn't help anyone become stronger and greater. Regardless, they already have a solution for the disabled. Add in traditional crossing markers etc. for them. Also, He said in the video that It saves more lives than it injures by a massive proportion and gave several statistical reports. I think you greatly underestimate what disabled people are actually capable of.
Not to mention people with anxiety. If the point is to increase everyone's stress levels, what would that do to someone who already tended to be stressed and anxious.
+vox I'm curious... while the flow (rate of crossing) of cars may have increased with the shared space, did the total number of cars or trucks go down as worried drivers learned to avoid the shared space and detoured around it? I can't imagine with the blind spots of a semi truck that they would enjoy shared spaces.
+Greg Davison No one is "losing" their "damn mind". It was a curiosity question. We often see statistics that show improvement in one area but don't reveal problems in other areas. Example: CPR save the lives of 8% of the people it is used on. But that doesn't say that 5 of that 8% will never have a normal life again. Try to remember that the average American drive time to work everyday is 48+ km and 45+ min. That is a lot of time in the car. But I still think driverless cars will make this all pointless, they treat all spaces like shared spaces.
Harvey Rabbit fair point, in a quick shot I would say that on the start of the implementation it will hold true, but the cost of detouring will increase to an unworthy level as an city keeps holding the plan of expanding shared spaces and forcing drivers to tackle and adapt to the system
+Giovane Dias - Which then begs the question, do incident rates go up when drivers who have intentionally avoided the shared spaces can no longer do so? I'm also curious about any correlation in shared space incidents during inclement weather.
boo yah yep, lots of questions arise when another way to look is added. While I don't have something to add to your questions yet, I ponder if cities will need to develop recycling programs for shared spaces or including them in curriculums for new licenses
Very good point. Another issue is, since it has been reported that drivers experience higher stress going through these spaces, what happens when their usage expands? The population ad a whole is already over stressed as it is, how will this additional stress on a daily commute affect our health?
It's hell for blind and partially sighted people though, often these town planners don't take into account the normal regulations for how you present a crosswalk for vision impared users, so they tend to make everything a fashionable grey, instead of the yellow vision impaired people can more easily see, they also neglect to add tactile paving which tells blind people when they're coming up to a crosswalk, tram platform, staircase etc.
The whole idea is false though. Shared space works for a short amount of time, because people are not used to it. As soon as they get used to the situation they speed up and stop paying attention to other roas users.
That is what Americans say all the time. Healthcare? Nah, won't work in merica. Gun control? Nah man, won't work. Tbh, I just think that Americans just don't like it to adapt something that was invented by a non-American.
@@Arlae_Nova Won't work in India either - many parts of their cities are already a free-for-all. The main problems are too many cars, too little space, not enough courtesy.
We are not following it, there is lack of infrastructure to put the traffic lights. Each road having a certain parameters has to have a traffic signal. But most of them don't have it due to several reasons.
In Bristol they just removed the roads, turned them into pedestrian zones and basically said 'okay cars you gotta go somewhere else' and made one single long road through the centre that's only one way.
so in Switzerland blind people with a guide dog or a cane always have right of way even if there is no crosswalk but most drivers just don’t know about this important rule if the poblic were informed about this one rule shared spaces would work for blind people as well
@@beepbop6542 The rest of the world isn't USA or just English speaking countries buddy, and I'm Italian... I could explain ya latin derivated words not vice versa :)
P̷s̷ʏ̷ᴄ̷ʜ̷ᴏ̷ᴛ̷ɪ̷ᴄ̷ R̷ᴀ̷ɪ̷ɴ̷ʙ̷ᴏ̷ᴡ̷ᴢ̷ Roundabouts don't happen much in America because most places were very planned out before construction. In other places you deal with a lot of 18th century(or older) city planning that doesn't quite function too well with modern technology.
P̷s̷ʏ̷ᴄ̷ʜ̷ᴏ̷ᴛ̷ɪ̷ᴄ̷ R̷ᴀ̷ɪ̷ɴ̷ʙ̷ᴏ̷ᴡ̷ᴢ̷ The thing roundabouts are best at is dealing with complicated intersections, especially ones that intersect at odd angles. Because America has so much space and modern planning, this rarely happens, though they are quite useful in other very specific circumstances.
Yes, they generally are very good at reducing the congestion of cars and make them flow quicker, Its just they often are not very good for dealing with pedestrians and as a result are often also under fire for this in places like America where people are not used to them, In the UK most have been around since the 1970s some as early as 1940 so most people have used them previously and they are generally just accepted.
In Europe, we have the rights-standing-priority rule (left-standing in the UK). The idea is that when there are no traffic lights, signs or even road marking the person on your right has priority and you have to let them pass through first. From my American/Canadian friends I've heard that they don't have this rule and are quite confuse by it when they have to drive around Europe.
@Paerback Salvation As a Canadian, I assure you that right-standing rules do exist and are on the books. However, there are very few unmarked intersections so there's a severe lack of practice and the few exceptions generally are scenarios where a "major" and "minor" road can be perceived, leading for people to instead treat it as though it were a signed yield on the "minor" road. It's actually one of the things that drivers ed programs emphasize because it is so poorly understood but since my driving test 15 years ago, I have not witnessed it be used in practice.
People near me drive 30 over the limit, don’t signal, cross multiple lanes at once, tailgate so close they can’t brake, etc. As much as I hate them I don’t trust they’d suddenly become respectful drivers if put in a shared space..
I'm visually impaired, and my first reaction was: if this would be implemented where I live, I would have to move, or risk being hit by a car daily. I'm glad at the end of the video, some people were smart and compassionate enough to recognize that fact.
Hi Jack, Just used my keyboard! There are three ways blind or visually impaired people can use a computer. If you can still see a little bit, you can use a program that enlarges text (and everything else). I mostly use a text-to-speech program, it reads everything aloud (also everything I write myself). Some blind people use a sort of Braille-screen (I'm sorry, I don't know the right word in English, in dutch it's called a brailleleesregel). It's a strip (it's quit bulky) that converts what's on your screen to braille. I never liked braille that much. I play the guitar (I'm a right-handed guitar player) and I'm a left-handed braille-reader. Because of playing the guitar my fingertips got hard, and because of that, I can't feel the braille dots that well (It's best to learn to read braille with two hands, but I never got the hang of it with my right hand).
Thank you for this detailed reply. This is something I've been curious about for a long time. Thank you for taking the time to explain and for sharing your experience.
Ha! Big failure. Notice that at 3:15, when the video was demonstrating that in the early 1900's where "shared spaces" where common place we can see a pedestrian in the right corner of the video almost being hit by a car. Wonder why they put all those signs in the streets since then.
Jose, it's not just the probability of being hit by a vehicle that's variable here, but also the potential impact of being hit. The discussion takes both of those into account and argues that shared spaces minimizes both; unless you could disabled folks. A person hit in a shared space will most likely not face critical injuries whereas a person hit in modern fast-moving signs/lights traffic is totally screwed (generally speaking).
Yeah nah, here in Belgium you have had them for decades in all towns and cities and they work perfectly, we two in the city and it's safe and efficient
José Paulo Traffic accident below 30km/h rarely do any harm what so ever to anybody. Shared spaces are mainly about that, decrease in speed to increase safety. Also back then car was absolute luxury. I will slow down for some poor folk? Nah he's not worth anything anyway.
No, having clear and easy to understand rules and regulations is always better than nothing at all. The reason they aren't followed in some countries is because they aren't enforced. Aimlessly driving in a crowd is just a disaster waiting to happen. That and it looks extremely stressful.
Shared spaces intersections look like trying to drive through a Walmart parking lot on Black Friday! Cars cannot move until you try to run over some pedestrians.
How can you say that it's a disaster waiting to happen, if in every single case where shared spaces were introduced, accidents rate dropped dramatically?
This is actually brilliant, but it relies pretty heavily on a specific set of preconditions being met: - it only works safely in small towns or areas with low amounts of relatively slow moving traffic (both foot and vehicles) - standard driving etiquette is observed by everyone - all of the drivers are competent and cautious As an US East Coast resident, I can definitively say that we satisfy literally none of these requirements. This is ideal for small towns with medieval layouts, not so much busy metropolises or towns with highways going through them.
There are modified shared spaces now popping up in NYC, which is decidedly NOT a small town with medieval layouts (outside downtown Manhattan, that is). Plenty of cars everywhere. It seems like the shared spaces work here too.
hmmmm, this works if only some areas are shared space. drivers will be more cautious around these areas. if everything was shared space, drivers need to be 100% alert at ALL times. it is impossible to be alert all the time, and will probably lead to accidents. ideally drivers are always alert, but being on high alert for extended periods will lead to fatigue...
i feel like this being everywhere would only be viable when self driving cars are like 80 or 90% of cars tbh. already most accidents come from driver fatigue&stress, after all.
Hawc if you read what I said, it is that nobody is 100% alert 100% of the time. That is simply not possible. Being 100% alert for a short period of time is possible, which is what these shared spaces are thought to do. If you could do it, that’s awesome! Sadly, my mind sometimes wander off, or I sing along with the radio in the car, thus making me not 100% alert.
3:14 Pedestrian is almost hit in the clip shown of the early 1900's, just before he says, "Vehicles couldn't go very fast back then." So now that they can go very fast, shared spaces will clearly be safer, right?
Well that's besides the fact that traffic accidents were common, they often hit pedestrians, and were hugely more lethal. People arguing for 'shared spaces' and saying "look at the early days", and then ignoring the fact that those early days quickly led to traffic rules and controlled intersections is a bit daft.
Automobiles and pedestrian pathways should be separate whenever possible. Their bedlam design is too chaotic and won't scale well for larger intersection. A circle one way intersection with yield signs works great because it keeps traffic flowing at a slow pace without chaos, but pedestrians still need more traditional control mechanisms and/or separate pathways.
6 ปีที่แล้ว +6
Problem is, people don't care for abiding by the traffic law, and nobody cares for those around him, so these shared spaces get installed as a way for the government to say "alright, then you figure it out yourselves". What theoretically is a great idea (traffic law, all the markings, signs, regulations), turns out to be completely pointless if a person jumps the red light because he's in a hurry.
Adolf Hitler I was in 2 accidents the 1 week I was in Cairo and saw numerous others, since you're clearly attempting to imply accidents aren't happening there.
There are very strict laws in Europe what to do when there is no signs. As probably most intersections in each country don't have any signs or crossings. Also, at least in theory, pedestrian is always above cars in hierarchy. If driver hit somebody even when pedestrian should be not on road in first place it's drivers problem especially when there is sign "people or road" or "shared space".
Network126 it is the same Everyday we have close calls, but in science it is beneficial for our brain development, Just like playing a hard game with one death only.😅
The thing is you become more observant when you enter a circle because you realize your safety depends more on how you pay attention so now everyone in the circle are paying more attention to driving than they would at a normal intersection, this is why they are safer
Lee D the problem is that whether its a shared space or a intersection. a blind person shouldn't be there anyway unless accompanied by another person who can see in order to direct them. so there goes that argument.
The shared space you showed in the beginning is just a few houndred meters from where I currently live. The first time I saw it I was confused by that sort of concept. After a while I got used to it and started to realise the idea behind all this. It actually works like a charm, all vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians watch out for each other and the quantity of accidents decreased to almost half compared to the previous roundabout.
Traffic engineer here, signalized lights are the absolute worst types of intersections other than 4 way stop sign non signalized ones. Roundabouts are known to be better on fuel efficiency and produce less severe accidents than signalized intersections. This shared space in theory would work best but in the USA we have trouble getting people to accept roundabouts over the perceived “safety” of a traffic light
Thomas Hallock In Canada, Ontario at least, Roundabouts are going up everywhere. I hear people complaining about them sometimes and I don't understand it, they're way better than traffic lights. Takes less than ten seconds to get through a roundabout, but it can take literal minutes to get through One traffic light.
wschippr S in the United States less than 1% of controlled intersections are roundabouts while there’s about 1000s as many signalized ones (traffic light). Which is why people here don’t like them
I imagine it's more of an issue in cost and space of retrofitting them, rather than a question of their practicality. I was in pheonix a couple years ago, and some of the newer developments had tonnes of roundabouts. My town of 160,000 has 4.
18snatan18TM I don't think you realize that political systems are not a new thing. Ancient humans and non humans such as chimpanzees have political struggle
"go back to good old days" is a reference to nostaligia and thing that we are used to. Without exeggeration good old ways were things that worked in the past, but were banned due to new rules made by lords (driving in a left part of the street is the oldest way, but Napoleon changed it to right part of a way), or just simply forgotten (concrete was forgotten in medival, but ancient romans used it all the time) .
Sagacious Eagle hmmm I wouldnt agree with that While its definitely an issue that will make congestion worst It's a symptom Not the cause What did you think happens People are taking bus route to avoid congestion Or People taking bus route cause congestion IMO more roads means less congestion, resulting in less law violation About driving attitude, pls explain more about it
They would in theory think that it's now more likely a pedestrian is in the road ahead/around the corner. And not floor it through *lights/signs? like they used to. Traffic lights and signs make us less observant of the actual road.
As a pedestrian who walked along Exhibition Road (note: *not* Kensington High Street), the cross sections usually ended up with near misses. I was almost hit 3 times in one month. The drivers would speed down the road and take the turns too quickly. They would get mad, not understanding the shared space concept, and frequently beep or shout at others on the road.
The safest place to cross /drive in is the one with slow moving traffic , everyone is cautious , no one gets to accelerate really fast over short distances which is the only major cause of confusion/accidents
As an Urban Planner in the Netherlands, Shared Space designs can be an absolute blessing. They make livability in a street way better and almost always reduce traffic accidents. Ofcourse you can't implement this everywhere. In my experience the most important factor is which vehicle category is dominant. Shared Space is best used in places where motorised vehicles are not the dominant factor, but rather pedestrians and bicycles traffic are. This forces drivers to pay attention to the slower and more 'fragile' people around them, far more so than if there were more cars then pedestrians and bicycles. Shared Space usually is implemented in and around city centres, areas where cars are kept out more and more, making way for slower traffic.
What about gas car consumption? It also depends on the pedestrian / car ratio: If their is more pedestrians it will be a nightmare for cars and time consuming, and the opposite too.
The primary function of roadsigns is to increase throughput. You'll have to provide a lot more evidence to convince me that this could possibly have higher throughput than giving precedence to the busier street (or a roundabout).
@@mr.amazinggaming1153 not true. roundabouts forces you to go slow. If you blast through, you will likely slide out and also, thats the point, you can go without stopping..
My town did this, utter chaos, even after 5 years. The problem is it is a through road, with no alternative. These things work in the right environment to low traffic, but if people have no option but to go through, then the traffic numbers stay the same and nothing is gained.
I, a am a disabled person and I am angered, how visually disabled people could see a LIGHT, a VISUAL signal anyways? Split walkways and car streets with shared spaces to avoid accidents
Would be nice to have data on how many people use these shared spaces in comparison to the previous layout. I would imagine that one big factor in why the accident rate dropped is because people want to dodge the unregulated areas.
We just added a round-a-bout in my community and I was talking with my grandma yesterday about how she needs to start taking it, even if she doesn't want to. She's been driving alternative routes for weeks.
They are specifically designed for high pedestrian areas in commercial areas. If anything pedestrians would increase. The biggest factor is because they are new, and people pay more attention to things which are different.
Thank you for the explanation on 'Shared spaces' Vox, in fact, I was wondering this question myself the other day as I crossed the street. The driver in the blue car instead of slowing down at the pedestrian crossing, the driver sped up and the others from behind saw me waiting - no one slowed down for a moment. I guess if people weren't in a rush all the time, they'd be more cautious about everyone - whether you're walking, bicycling or on motorcycling.
I think the main worry for pedestrians is the idea that it depends on everyone trusting everyone else to pay attention and create compromises within a few moments time. Without signs you haves to trust peoples judgement without too much time for warning, whereas with lights and street signs you can blame it on written rules. Its sorta like falling backwards and having someone say they'll catch you on "3, 2, 1" rather than expecting when they'll be ready. Not downing this concept though, I just feel where the worry comes from.
I'm all for shared space but I think one more feature would be great. What about building bridges that pedestrians can use to cross roads without interfering with the traffic
I really appreciate that they put it on hold until they could improve it based on actually asking disabled people. It is so vital to include a wide variety of us in this safety conversation. As a disabled person, I would be nervous about crossing until then, because I take more time to walk and I want to be safe.
The Psychology of all this in incredibly fascinating. It is so interesting! Many things are counterintuitive. And we just stick to what we know because its what we are accustomed to. And just accepting it and rather then questioning it and finding new better alternatives. We stick to what we know even if there are other better ideas. Its sad. :( I think the truth lies somewhere in a middle ground concept.
One thing about the signs is that people care more about followwing them...or rather not braking the rules too much, they do not pay attention to traffic. If people dod not watch theeir speed and looked out of the car to watch other cars, pedestrians, it would be much safer. That is what needs to be encouraged, culture in which people pay attention to their surroundings.
1) It forces cars to give pedestrians the right of way and travel at their speed, thus making it safer. The video detailed massive accident reductions where this has been implemented. 2) It improves traffic flow in areas with a large number of pedestrians crossing the road. Instead of concentrating pedestrian flow to one cross walk (forcing cars to wait), pedestrians can cross the road from all over the place. This allows cars to always be able to drive, even if they do it slowly, since pedestrians can walk around them.
Something you, however, need to note that wasn't stated in the video is that the shared spaces also saw a decrease in automobile traffic. The reasoning behind this has majorly been shown to a couple ideas. One is that automobiles have found new routes during the constructions of these shared spaces and thus have not fully moved back to them. Next people have discovered the slower speed of these shared spaces and the new routes they have discovered have shown to them to be faster. Thus the traffic of this area overall has stagnated and overall lower then what it was before. Thus accommodating the fact that yes there will be fewer accidents and less serious situation due to the decrease in traffic.
Marty toofree don't know either way. It would take a lot of studying. Like a panel of people do discuss the upsides and downsides of each different method. I'm just saying its interesting how situational dynamics change a lot by changing one or two things. What's good or bad is up for discussion. Point is, we need to have that discussion. About what is effective!! Rather then just doing things because we have become accustomed to it cuz its am old tradition or something we have done for a long time. I'm saying there are good ideas out there that we do not take into account simple cuz we are not accustomed to it. Have a beautiful day! :)
It seems curious to omit the collision last month on Exhibition Road London, in which 11 were injured, along the video evidence from the same road. Many press reports at the time referred to the video as 'mounting the kerb' being unfamiliar with the area, but of course there was none and it's hard to think of such a thing happening if kerbs were there. But compared to often gushing coverage this is fairly balanced. The biggest success story here is Drachten in the Netherlands, with an 1800% drop in injuries! But they are serious and have been for decades about filtering motor traffic away from residential or city centre streets. These designs are most succesful when so few cars or buses use the area that as a driver you naturally feel 'foreign' and so overtaking cyclists or assuming pedestrians will wait is not something many drivers will do. The lesson we should draw from India (or even Poynton, those roundabouts are on the main road into Manchester) is that motor traffic naturally dominates unsegregated spaces. Where motor vehicles counts are too high, cyclists and pedestrians either need protected space, as you will see on any major road in Drachten, or measures to reduce the amount of traffic are needed, through modal filtering, narrowing, etc.
In an actually crowded area this would either end up being dangerous once people get used to it, or it will be a parking lot with people yelling and honking.
can someone correct me if im wrong, but if the statistics say it is saving lives, then why are people complaining?. is not like every street will end up without traffic lights, maybe this will be useful at some places to improve trafic. thats all...
brandon There is obviously much more going on that they've not bothered to mention. A wise man said to seek the truth, one must start with asking what they did not say.
They're saying there's less accidents because everyone's so stressed as they approach the intersection. Kind of like saying there's no shark deaths at a beach where they have alarms going & signs warning that a shark has been spotted & is currently swimming around 50metres offshore - of course there's no deaths if people are too scared to go into the water lol The disabled issue, is that with a disability, your far more dependent on routine than most people & small changes can cause big problems, especially if you haven't been given advanced notice so you can plan. I get this all the time in my wheelchair - things like a footpath closed & sign saying so & directing to use the other path - but no curb ramp to get off the road & onto the footpath! A blind person first encountering this intersection is going to be looking for the pedestrian crossing, assuming it's been moved somewhere & being unable to find it. Without prior notice, it won't occur to them that they're just supposed to wander across the road anywhere they feel like! (and is that the best strategy for them? If not, what are they supposed to do?)
Saving lives. Sure. But traffic may be slower. People may take alternative routes when walking e.g with a disabled person or child. Hence less people overall taking the routes and thus less accidents.
So if a pedestrian gets hit who's at fault? The car or the pedestrian? If there's a car wreck who's at fault? These "shared spaces" don't have any rules and so therefore who's at fault and who's not?
Couldn’t there be a mix? Like a standard shared space but with some optional crosswalks with proper sound and path indicators, that activate traffic lights with only yellow and red. As someone who isn’t visually impaired I wouldn’t bother to walk to the crossing if I could legally and safely do otherwise. But for those with guide dogs or canes they can learn the paths as they do now.
This is how streets in India work (most of the time). Although people from other countries may find Indian roads too chaotic, people on streets are usually more aware.
They tried this in Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and after several serious incidents and even more traffic jamming, they turned it back. People had become just as cocky as in normal traffic situations and were speeding, cutting other people off, not paying proper attention. Also visually impaired people started avoiding these areas since they felt far too vulnerable in these grey areas of pure chaos. It's a perfect solution for low traffic flow areas (outside of the city centre), but in more busy areas it just doesn't work its magic.
Lol, it felt like talking about the unorganized junctions in 3rd world countries in a neat way. I can now say that media is so powerful in term of viewing certain opinions.
honestly trying to cross a rlly busy intersection on a bike is so nerve racking cuz even tho the light is red drivers can turn right so u have to look for that and the opposite side of traffic is moving in EVERY direction, when those streets have something in the middle so u can go halfway at a time is rlly nice
![Stroads are Ugly, Expensive, and Dangerous (and they're everywhere) [ST05]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ORzNZUeUHAM/mqdefault.jpg)
It's amazing that I didn't even consider how this would effect people with disabilities until they brought it up, it really does highlight how important it is to consult and consider everyone when designing public spaces
They must have thought about it before commencing the project right? It’s one thing to forget about it during a 5 minute video where you’ve never given it thought. It’s another thing to plan for months and months and not consider it
@@realitities2 you overestimate the human specie and give evidence of how it could fail all in a simple comment. what do you think happen when there is many people working on a project? people split task and things like this can often end in the hand of only one person or multiple that aren't trying to hard and just bank on the fact that the others will put in the work of thinking about everything. oversight are really easy.
ThePrettyPetard yea that’s a good point I hadn’t considered
It's the reason why these are prototype streets. They made them to test their effectiveness, and they happen to be far more effective. 1 issue per year, as opposed to 36, is worth sacrificing 1 blind person.
Sure, that's controversial, but the end result is still better. What is 1 life against 35?
And it could have just been chance. It's not like blind people _never_ get hit in normal crossings. Maybe that case just happened to be in that space.
There were still _able_ people who got hurt in them too. 1 blind guy gets hit and people make a big deal of it, but half-a-dozen able people get hit and nobody even flinches. Blind people aren't more valuable than others. Vice versa, too. The cases are lower, period. They are better than normal crossings.
Zaire Exactly
People always drive slowly in unfamiliar driving scenarios. I'm not sure these would be as safe if they became more commonplace.
Yeah, ikr? People will just assume nothing to happen and others to move for them xD
I guess it works because it’s 1 strange and 2 people are taught how to behave by other junctions, those with traffic lights, and the tickets they can get by misbehaving there and they copy their habits and fears into these shared spaces. It wouldn’t work in some Kazakhstan or India where people drive like mad
From my past 17 years in india, I can assure you this works. This totally works.
@@gaabsmrr hey dude, india people drive sensibly and slower than usa. And first of all we don't have traffic lights except at heavy traffic roads. Some intersections do get quite busy, but they function as shared spaces. There hasn't been a single accident near me.
The shared space in Ashford is much larger than just Elwick Square, most of the shots and clips are from Ashford on this video. I can safely say that drivers do not slow down on that road
This only work with less traffic. Heavy traffic will just end up in a jam.
Well, you don't have to install them everywhere. Just install them where suitable and leave the old intersections where not.
That's not true Ian, they also talked about it in Kengsington, London, which is the capital of the UK.
This is why you only implement it in city/town centers to encourage people to come and walk and have the heavy traffic diverted round.
Junior Jaw that street you mentioning is 14 lanes wide with mid level traffic and pedestrains are crossing the road at the next traffic guided junction. This doesnt prove it works on heavy traffic
I agree. This method may not work in the streets of New York. Too many people, too many cars.
Introducing: roundabouts.
the problem with roundabouts is the same as with traffic lights: traffic congestion
@@wizardtuga Introducing: Roundabouts with overpasses for people on foot + transit roads that go around cities instead of directly through them
@@wizardtuga Introducing: Light-controlled roundabouts
The words will make you out and out.
@@sushi4o2 ZA WARUDO
We can’t even handle roundabouts in America man. Shared spaces would be detrimental.
But in europe we are used to not crashing into one another even when that isnt prevented by rules or regulation
Shared space is a general term, not just used for streets
They wouldn't be good for placed where traffic is assumed to be fast, like the outskirts of towns, but in the medium borders of city centers, they could help serve as a cue to start slowing down or find a place to park before entering the pedestrian dominant urban core. For disabled or blind people, we need to have bumps to at least separate sidewalks from dangerous drivers and crosswalk signals to buy time for slower pedestrians.
The Portsmouth New Hampshire roundabout makes me want to die every time I go thru it
People are fine with crashing into another vehicle if they can be better than 50% certain they can blame the other guy.
I wonder if this lower numbers of accidents are because of novelty? Maybe if people start to get more comfortable with this, they might start to speed.
that's what I was thinking
Absolutely. This is just a disaster waiting to happen while a bunch of hipster urban planners are patting themselves in their backs.
@@Fr4ncM it's just an idea
Nah I doubt it. Always gotta be cautious with civilizations. Ain't nobody want to deal with that
Yeah, that's true
Making them feel unsafe makes them safe
Yeah that's pretty much street design. Make people feel too safe and they become reckless. Pretty mind-blowing reverse psychology stuff.
Reminds me of the bicycle helmet discussion. Studies showed that drivers don't keep distance to cyclists when they wear helmets.
Only works for so long though. When people see it more they'll find ways to efficiently navigate to the detriment and possible demise of pedestrians. It's only sort of safe because it's currently unfamiliar.
not the blind guy who died
The fact that this was a year ago & is just recently getting replies🗿🔫
I'm pretty sure people would start to get used to it, go faster and more comfortably and accidents would slowly start to happen.
I can imagine that one guy in his truck trying to pass a car agressively in one of these spaces.
Hmmm, should we listen to some random guy on TH-cam applying his "common sense" thinking to something he just learned about on a video, or should we listen to the people who design and carefully study these systems?
Tough choice.
@@jmckendry84 good one
@@jmckendry84 as a traffic engineer, id just like to mention that "traffic studies" are the most non-scientific, smallest sample sizing, false model dependent, often outdated, and often contradicting "studies" that youve ever seen, held together with bubblegum and duct tape.
The Menthologist I agree because iirc when Sweden switched from the left to the right side of the road people were much more careful and accidents plummeted but rose back up as they got used to it
signs and rules are not only for safety, it's also to determine who is guilty if accident happens . how you will determine that in "shared space"?
I suppose it encourages honesty and cooperation. Someone would need to fess up and say "i was on my phone".
In the Netherlands, cars are always guilty when hitting a child under the age of 14 and 50% guilty when hitting an adult cyclist.
Nina Banana I smell an easy insurance scam
@@ninabanana8730 I think in the US you're 100% guilty if you hit someone with your car. But then again I'm not 100% sure
@@lukasguderjahn Insurance here onlu covers hospital bills so no one cares
Two points:
Years ago my city experienced a blackout for the better part of a day and I noticed drivers automatically treated every intersection like a 4-way stop.
And, the current system in America assumes all streets and roads are for cars, therefore most drivers resent any accommodation for pedestrians, bikes, skateboards or even trucks, as if they have no right to be there.
Glad people where you live know what to do when traffic lights go out. Where I live people don't treat them as 4 way stops. Its just go when you feel like it.
Exactly, shared spaces work well in areas with high pedestrian traffic and low vehicle traffic. Pedestrians get more pavement space (which can be very limited, especially in the UK) and cars have to slow down. Seems a bit like a stopgap before complete pedestrianisation.
That's because that's what the law usually is when traffic lights are out and no one is directing traffic.
You don't need to experiment with it, just go to Egypt, it's been like that for all of history. There are street signs but they're completely ignored. I fear for my life every time I cross the street
In places where there has always been a lack of what is traditional urban street design in the west means this type of shared space design is not new. It's lack of newness means it will not make anyone uncomfortable, and thus will not slow down.
If anything, the traditional western street design successfully implemented in places like Egypt is what would slow people down. Because it would be new and unfamiliar.
@@callmeswivelhips8229 nah, it only works because of law enforcement
Those shared spaces are not designed as per the given principles.
Most likely you are talking about roads that were built without any guiding oversight or plan, just like roads that are built at the outskirts of an expanding city.
I live in India and I see both of these designs (Planned and Unplanned Shared Spaces), and trust me, the Planned shared spaces are much better than the ones that are just unplanned
Me as an Indian: I've been doing this my whole life!
That's what I was searching in comments 😂, we are too advanced.
Haitians too!
Honking and peep peep
yes bro , I would like to know if driving like this a nature talent or you adapt it afterwards ? and can the skill be exported to other country ? because the indian people in my country drive like this too
@@wanpomade3826 It's like we are used to this since we were born so it's a skill everyone acquires to cope up with the surroundings.
When we have the occasional power outage here, it's amazing how everyone cooperates safely at intersections (when the street lights are out). Like the video says, everyone slows down, is patient, and makes eye contact. Kind of a similar concept.
LA Fresh Life
Whoa that is an *excellent* analogy, and so true. As a pedestrian, when there are no/non-working traffic lights, the drivers will make eye contact and wave me on to cross the street. Also, the cars will progress the same direction a pedestrian is crossing, then switch sides.
It may look convoluted, but it seems to work in theory. Aside from the visualy impared people who might not be able to see the hand waving gesture to pass or incoming cars.
agreed, but I've always wondered if that power outage attitude would actually remain if the power wasn't fixed, or if it's just happening because of the novelty of it
But depending on where the power outage occurs, it also causes a massive amount of traffic congestion that can last for hours. Which is why this shared space stuff can only be useful in small towns at best.
K6GSXRider that's a good point!
hmm I'm thinking, but after people are used to it, natural patterns will start to occur, such as cars travelling in groups & then a break while another road's group goes through, but if that was to happen, while traffic could end up comparable to regular lights based intersections, or even slightly better like the video claims, the flip side of that is you'd start to see the sort of thing you currently see at lights, where people speed up to get through the light changing to red & as soon as that happens, all the claimed increased safety from this goes out the window & it becomes biggest/heaviest wins
Shared spaces only work short term, in the long run, people will get used to the designs and stop being cautious, increasing speed and acting recklessly with no signs or lights to regulate movement, accidents will start to become more and more common.
In countries like the US especially, this wouldn't work period. American roads are just way too big and the US has far more drivers.
There are other ways of increasing road/car safety that are much more effective.
The British Patriot
This is just another excuse for a bankrupt city council to cut costs.
Wouldn't bigger streets be more helpful?
Right, if you change anything dramatically, at first you’ll have people being more cautious
I won't be surprised that in the long run, they'll end up like China, with complete lawlessness being the norm.
We already have something similar to shared spaces in residential neighborhoods, where there often aren't signs at intersections. We don't have an increased consciousness at these intersections, because we're used to them. I know from experience that I very often make incorrect assumptions at these. Also, the only way that shared spaces can work is if everyone understands the same mores (such as right of way) when crossing through the space. When I'm in other countries, I _need_ road signs in order to figure out what to do in certain circumstances, since the rules of the road aren't always the same as in the U.S.
Everyone should just ride Ripstiks everywhere, then we'd all be happy
24 Frames Of Nick someone gets me finally
Fidget spinners increase the safety of ripstiks exponentially
You've single-handedly solved the traffic crisis in one sentence.
As nice as that sounds, that still doesn't satisfy the blind people lol
I would kill myself on a ripstick by running into another ripstick
Guy: is talking about how shared space is safe
The guy that nearly got run over during the explanation: 3:15
The guy is saying that it's SAFER and Less dangerous as cars weren't going that fast at the time.
Yup
@@conejitorosada2326 yeah wait for them to say "I drove this street many times if I speed nothing will happen" We are back to the 20 century
@@flareon9371 What do you mean?
@@conejitorosada2326 When you drive for first time you slow down, wait 3-4 months and cars will become India
I guess such system promotes defensive driving and that you have to give to get in return. What many people fail to recognize is that driving is like a language. You have to hear when somebody's talking and vice versa. From my experience, both systems are good, you just have to have drivers that are willing to accept change. Change is troublesome
That's exactly how you drive in India.
Elsewhere in the world, honking is considered aggressive. In India, honking is like waving a Hi, a form of communication that horns are made for, horns are not made for swearing.
This is based on the assumption that drivers are going to be civil. Try spending some time in Vietnam where rules exist, but aren't followed. It is essentially this system that is being advocated. It doesn't work so well. Its effectiveness depends entirely on the culture it is placed in. IN England, they will be civil with and without traffic signs. In Vietnam, they won't be civil with or without traffic signs.
*Civil eh? Come here to the Philippines.*
Bra, have you watched Brazilian or Russian roads? They're *worse*
Sounds like it's based on observation and evidence, rather than assumptions ...
Then the problem is law enforcement, not traffic infrastructure.
assumption? Its facts.
Shared space only works if you still have roads with normal rules. Otherwise having no signs would be the norm and people would start to drive carelessly on shared space roads like people do now on normal roads
I don't know, I'm split for and against this.
In New York, USA city of Manhattan, this is normal especially hot spots like Times Square. They have cross walks and traffic lights like all other cities but everyone just crossed AFTER the car passed them, and cyclist give no f's.
Yet in Las Vegas, USA there are overpasses, wide cross walks that hover over the traffic. So all the pedestrians and cyclist (rare) would be up there and cars below.
That's inspired from Indian traffic system 😆
India doesn't have a traffic system, fool!
@@santoshpatil6095 I think you just haven't been to India, Santosh
Rather, the lack thereof lmao
David Hawiger Santosh is from India I guess 😜
John Karavitis Well you Right India 🇮🇳 doesn’t have any traffic system, Actually Indians hate systems 😆 they are normal people and never put their head in those things, I can they are spiritual and simple Livers, Systems force them to do something that they don’t want to do, so I say Indian don’t have traffic system like west have BUT people are still surviving And living just like a western, Both countries have countless road accidents every year.
This is an interesting idea and could probably work in some European countries or small towns, but the problem is you have to hope that everyone on the road is a rational, reasonable, and reliable human being that won't speed up in the middle of all this because the person in front of them is "going to slow" and try to cut them off, in big citys like LA, New York, Chicago, Miami, Seattle, etcc. I just don't see this being a thing.
waffle2434 I think roundabouts work on streets without very high traffic (major main roads)...
Well in China, roads are pretty much somewhat chaotic yet they don't have huge problems. Even in top tier cities.
Yeah. In Malaysia, you see a lot of those people everywhere. Most of them drive as if they wanted to be Kamikazes themselves. Crass, rude and suicidal. And these same people would scratch their heads as to why they ended up in a hospital with a broken limb, if they were unfortunate enough.
It works quite well in Paris.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Place_Charles_de_Gaulle
Exactly, the way American roads are designed (large intersections often allowing very high speeds), this would just be very impractical and extremely dangerous. Perhaps in certain downtown areas this would work but definitely not widespread
Yea come to India. I'll wire a million bucks if you cross the shared space safely and quickly, and another million if the vehicles wait for a pedestrian
Pay for my airfare
Hugh Miller pay for yourself ya lazy van
H.vinayak gadiyar It’s called a joke. It flew right over your head, just like the airplane Hugh was talking about.
Aperture Science Nice one 😂😂
Aperture Science only morons take TH-cam comments seriously
Demagogue was used in this video:
in 3:55 it's said that "accidents drop from 36 in four years to 1 in a year""
This leaves the listener with the rate 36 to1', instead of the real numbers of 8 to 1
still its a big difference
yoav tamir they say it like that because more than likely there were anomalies such as 16 In 1 year or something and just used the other 3 to average it out
No, it leaves the listener with exactly what was stated.
it is bad use of statitstics but not overly bad and probably justified because there is not enough data on the new system which is in place for a year or two. One thing to note is that if there is big change in the rules people tend to be more careful that would worry me about those statistics a lot.
Imagine spending millions of $$$ to return streets the way they used to be
Exactly. What kind of idiocy is this💀
It saves lives. So i would say it is worth it
Why would they need to revert roundabouts to the original road pattern?
@@marcokester8082 would you multi task on a gas stove if you ONLY used electric? What if you got comfortable with using a gas stove?
The 4 million said in the video was spend on the entite towns infrastructure not only this shared space I believe. Still expensive but not as worse as it first looks
I feel like this isn't too much of a step from roundabouts, just go slow and be aware of your surroundings, then if someone steps onto the road by accident it's quicker to stop, and also a faster flow of traffic rather than waiting at a red light when it's clear.
but roundabouts still have rules and no pedestrians are on them. This is a free for all and I see it being incredibly dangerous especially from a driver's perspective.
True, but it's just one step away. I've been on roundabouts with four or five exits and a zebra crossing at each exit. You have to be aware of your surrounds all the time on it, and for a short period of time (the time it takes you to drive through the intersection) that's perfectly fine. Also I think drivers will instinctively give way to the right as you can see a small 'hump' in the middle of the area, having learnt and spent time on roundabouts it'd be a pretty easy transition.
I think roundabouts are better than this mess.
i thought the same, and in the netherlands most common roundabouts already handle cars, bikes and pedestrians at the same time.
Lol I wonder why America has almost no roundabouts
I think the best option is in the middle. Roundabouts offer the same sort of openness and awareness with some minor signage so its not total chaos.
Doing traffic lights in roundabouts is tricky.
this is still not a solution for people who are blind and visually impaired. Roundabout are very hard to cross when you can't see and they don't build them with the ap!propriate devices to help (audibles).
Leslie bailiff. Audibles, like car sounds? lol
that is not enough blind people depend on s traffic surge and the sound that the traffic makes and in addition the noise ( audible pedestrian signal) too help them. With the traffic going the same direction they are they are unable to cross.
Roundabouts actually decrease safety for pedestrians.
Why?
Because driver want to be on circle thus he accelerate fast and don't look for pedestrians. And when driver want to exit circle driver also don't look for pedestrians to execute maneuver as fast as it's possible.
Shared spaces work at least in Europe because it's not uncommon in most places for people to be everywhere and roads to be shared, for well as long cars exist. Also if driver hit anybody especially on shared space it's driver problem and there is no excuse.
Less traffic accidents, more cardiovascular disease related deaths.
Gidieugene
Fear. Fear will keep them all in line. Fear of getting killed on the road with no legal recourse.
4G12 except when they're drunk
*Fewer
Win Win
We have this in India, pretty much every place is a "shared place" where pedestrians can cross the road freely and cars driver super slowly. The cars drive super slow because of traffic and the pedestrians cross the road freely because they aren't any crosswalks
Will never work here in the US
Ｎ ｏ ｔ ｗ ｉ ｔ ｈ ｔ ｈ ａ ｔ ａ ｔ ｔ ｉ ｔ ｕ ｄ ｅ
youfoundisaac
Oh, have you been here before, where roads are designed to be fast in the South, and where pedistrians abuse their right of way when crossing the street? Where in California, a driver's license is nicknamed the killing license because the driving test is a joke? Where drivers in the city are rude and don't know of this thing called a turn signal? Where the car traffic is high?
And why don't you imagine this working in India, or a Third World country? No body thinks it's a good idea, and they slug it through there. Look at that bloody traffic.
We have these but they're in neighborhoods, notice how there's no stop signs at intersections in neighborhoods?
The driver is supposed to assume the right-of-way when approaching the intersection.
There's too many idiots here, the amount of people I see stop in roundabouts is appalling.
ABCantonese Brother I live in a 3rd world country and all of the traffic is like this. It's goddamn amazing.
this looks like any big city in india or africa, nothing new
They go over how it's nothing new in the actual video
It’s a horrible idea all you have to do is look at India and Philippines and appreciate traffic light that’s why traffic law were made accident were common back then
Brennen Rivera not really there is a large difference between situations like that and these ones. People in countries like india and the philippines dont tend to follow road laws as much.
I don't think there is any point to change any of this considering that self-automated cars are not very far off from the future. Automated cars are extremely safe even though humans don't "feel" safe. Watch CGP Grey's video th-cam.com/video/iHzzSao6ypE/w-d-xo.html
as long as i still get the option to drive im all for self driving cars
Is there a study that shows the same effect for a reverse change? I mean, is there a place where there has always been a shared space and there were little accidents and then the traffic lights were installed and suddenly the accidents rate increased? (One should be careful to choose a place where the traffic lights were installed not because of a sharp rise of traffic because then the rise in accidents wouldn’t be due to traffic lights but the higher traffic itself)
It definitely seems reasonable to say that because shared spaces are safer overall, learning how to incorporate disabled bodies into the design before implementing them would be the best step forward.
the rate might increase, but serious ones will almost dissapear is what i think
The "disabled question" seems like a no-brainer to me: you just make sure there is a way to alert everyone that a disabled person is crossing, whether that's their aide, or some button that activates special lights or whatever. Since they are a tiny minority, having a special, unique measure in place for them seems like the most perfectly appropriate response.
It makes sense at first, since we rely too much on signs and lights and this makes us think more. But it sounds really dangerous for disabled people.
Then again, more average people are saved then disabled people died.
But I could save a smaller percentage of average people than the percentage of disabled people it kills.
The point is to increase people stress levels and force them to use their senses and interact with one another. If a blind person needs to cross, a stranger will assist them. If not, they must be forced to use their other senses, adapt and survive. It's what humans do best. Holding their hands and treating them like useless babies doesn't help anyone become stronger and greater. Regardless, they already have a solution for the disabled. Add in traditional crossing markers etc. for them.
Also, He said in the video that It saves more lives than it injures by a massive proportion and gave several statistical reports. I think you greatly underestimate what disabled people are actually capable of.
Not to mention people with anxiety. If the point is to increase everyone's stress levels, what would that do to someone who already tended to be stressed and anxious.
Mmm yes but why woukd a disabled be driiving in the first place.
+vox
I'm curious... while the flow (rate of crossing) of cars may have increased with the shared space, did the total number of cars or trucks go down as worried drivers learned to avoid the shared space and detoured around it?
I can't imagine with the blind spots of a semi truck that they would enjoy shared spaces.
+Greg Davison
No one is "losing" their "damn mind". It was a curiosity question. We often see statistics that show improvement in one area but don't reveal problems in other areas.
Example: CPR save the lives of 8% of the people it is used on. But that doesn't say that 5 of that 8% will never have a normal life again.
Try to remember that the average American drive time to work everyday is 48+ km and 45+ min. That is a lot of time in the car. But I still think driverless cars will make this all pointless, they treat all spaces like shared spaces.
Harvey Rabbit fair point, in a quick shot I would say that on the start of the implementation it will hold true, but the cost of detouring will increase to an unworthy level as an city keeps holding the plan of expanding shared spaces and forcing drivers to tackle and adapt to the system
+Giovane Dias - Which then begs the question, do incident rates go up when drivers who have intentionally avoided the shared spaces can no longer do so?
I'm also curious about any correlation in shared space incidents during inclement weather.
boo yah yep, lots of questions arise when another way to look is added. While I don't have something to add to your questions yet, I ponder if cities will need to develop recycling programs for shared spaces or including them in curriculums for new licenses
Very good point. Another issue is, since it has been reported that drivers experience higher stress going through these spaces, what happens when their usage expands? The population ad a whole is already over stressed as it is, how will this additional stress on a daily commute affect our health?
It's hell for blind and partially sighted people though, often these town planners don't take into account the normal regulations for how you present a crosswalk for vision impared users, so they tend to make everything a fashionable grey, instead of the yellow vision impaired people can more easily see, they also neglect to add tactile paving which tells blind people when they're coming up to a crosswalk, tram platform, staircase etc.
6 minutes isn't that long, watch the whole video before commenting.
Yeah, but from 23 per 3 years to just one per year I think is worth the sacrifice. At least until we find a better solution.
MDL Channel
Bruh
The whole idea is false though. Shared space works for a short amount of time, because people are not used to it. As soon as they get used to the situation they speed up and stop paying attention to other roas users.
@@TheHadrian54 bruh what, he's correct
I am blind and I absolutely agree with lighted intersections. Being able to cross whenever would make me get lost in the street.
No offense but I’m wondering how you typed this comment if you are blind
@@creamyice8615 text to speech.
@@albinoguidedog Oh ok my bad
Demanding society forego the use of vastly superior systems in order to cater to outliers who adapt to them less easily is foolish.
@@PolariusKarnun meaning?
I do this all the time in cities skylines, it really works...
oh wow it works in a game so it must work in actual life
its a simulation, not a game
Cities Skylines might not have a sufficiently accurate model of driver and pedestrian behaviour though.
seasong It works because your cims can easily walk and clip through vehicles as if they weren't there.
seasong because cars can go through each other in Cities: Skyline. If only real-life works that way...
Dope idea. Wont work in america. Everybody is speeding.
That is what Americans say all the time. Healthcare? Nah, won't work in merica. Gun control? Nah man, won't work. Tbh, I just think that Americans just don't like it to adapt something that was invented by a non-American.
tf? Lots of things in American society have been adopted from non-Americans. Remember that a fairly large portion of Americans were immigrants!
@@PigeonFlare haha u mean all of them were immigrants except for the Indian Americans!
@@Arlae_Nova Won't work in India either - many parts of their cities are already a free-for-all. The main problems are too many cars, too little space, not enough courtesy.
Everyone everywhere is speeding
We have been following this in India for years now. No traffic light, no signals, no markings, didn't ever think anyone will purposely adopt it.
Athul Rajagopal
It's a tacit admission that the local council is bankrupt and can't afford proper infrastructure.
We are not following it, there is lack of infrastructure to put the traffic lights. Each road having a certain parameters has to have a traffic signal. But most of them don't have it due to several reasons.
In Bristol they just removed the roads, turned them into pedestrian zones and basically said 'okay cars you gotta go somewhere else' and made one single long road through the centre that's only one way.
Do you find that better or worse?
I wish i lived in a walkable city.
sarcasmo57 what city do you live in?
Sameee
so in Switzerland blind people with a guide dog or a cane always have right of way even if there is no crosswalk
but most drivers just don’t know about this important rule
if the poblic were informed about this one rule shared spaces would work for blind people as well
Cane = Dog in Italian. The rest of the World "Cane means smart doggo"
@@marco.castiglia Canine means a genus that dogs are in (also includes wolves and others), cane means a walking stick.
@@beepbop6542 The rest of the world isn't USA or just English speaking countries buddy, and I'm Italian... I could explain ya latin derivated words not vice versa :)
Roundabouts are a good compromise imo.
P̷s̷ʏ̷ᴄ̷ʜ̷ᴏ̷ᴛ̷ɪ̷ᴄ̷ R̷ᴀ̷ɪ̷ɴ̷ʙ̷ᴏ̷ᴡ̷ᴢ̷
Roundabouts don't happen much in America because most places were very planned out before construction. In other places you deal with a lot of 18th century(or older) city planning that doesn't quite function too well with modern technology.
P̷s̷ʏ̷ᴄ̷ʜ̷ᴏ̷ᴛ̷ɪ̷ᴄ̷ R̷ᴀ̷ɪ̷ɴ̷ʙ̷ᴏ̷ᴡ̷ᴢ̷
The thing roundabouts are best at is dealing with complicated intersections, especially ones that intersect at odd angles. Because America has so much space and modern planning, this rarely happens, though they are quite useful in other very specific circumstances.
Yes, they generally are very good at reducing the congestion of cars and make them flow quicker, Its just they often are not very good for dealing with pedestrians and as a result are often also under fire for this in places like America where people are not used to them, In the UK most have been around since the 1970s some as early as 1940 so most people have used them previously and they are generally just accepted.
In Europe, we have the rights-standing-priority rule (left-standing in the UK). The idea is that when there are no traffic lights, signs or even road marking the person on your right has priority and you have to let them pass through first. From my American/Canadian friends I've heard that they don't have this rule and are quite confuse by it when they have to drive around Europe.
@Paerback Salvation
As a Canadian, I assure you that right-standing rules do exist and are on the books. However, there are very few unmarked intersections so there's a severe lack of practice and the few exceptions generally are scenarios where a "major" and "minor" road can be perceived, leading for people to instead treat it as though it were a signed yield on the "minor" road. It's actually one of the things that drivers ed programs emphasize because it is so poorly understood but since my driving test 15 years ago, I have not witnessed it be used in practice.
It would make them safer for a while and on a small scale.
After a while, people will just stop caring and it will become literal India.
Did this happen with jay walking though?
People near me drive 30 over the limit, don’t signal, cross multiple lanes at once, tailgate so close they can’t brake, etc. As much as I hate them I don’t trust they’d suddenly become respectful drivers if put in a shared space..
I'm visually impaired, and my first reaction was: if this would be implemented where I live, I would have to move, or risk being hit by a car daily. I'm glad at the end of the video, some people were smart and compassionate enough to recognize that fact.
Maarten just curious...how did you manage to type this comment?
Hi Jack, Just used my keyboard! There are three ways blind or visually impaired people can use a computer. If you can still see a little bit, you can use a program that enlarges text (and everything else). I mostly use a text-to-speech program, it reads everything aloud (also everything I write myself). Some blind people use a sort of Braille-screen (I'm sorry, I don't know the right word in English, in dutch it's called a brailleleesregel). It's a strip (it's quit bulky) that converts what's on your screen to braille. I never liked braille that much. I play the guitar (I'm a right-handed guitar player) and I'm a left-handed braille-reader. Because of playing the guitar my fingertips got hard, and because of that, I can't feel the braille dots that well (It's best to learn to read braille with two hands, but I never got the hang of it with my right hand).
Thank you for this detailed reply. This is something I've been curious about for a long time. Thank you for taking the time to explain and for sharing your experience.
Ha! Big failure. Notice that at 3:15, when the video was demonstrating that in the early 1900's where "shared spaces" where common place we can see a pedestrian in the right corner of the video almost being hit by a car. Wonder why they put all those signs in the streets since then.
José Paulo
The 😈 is in the details. 😉
José Paulo there’s an Adam ruins everything about this, basically it’s because the media changed things
Jose, it's not just the probability of being hit by a vehicle that's variable here, but also the potential impact of being hit. The discussion takes both of those into account and argues that shared spaces minimizes both; unless you could disabled folks.
A person hit in a shared space will most likely not face critical injuries whereas a person hit in modern fast-moving signs/lights traffic is totally screwed (generally speaking).
Yeah nah, here in Belgium you have had them for decades in all towns and cities and they work perfectly, we two in the city and it's safe and efficient
José Paulo
Traffic accident below 30km/h rarely do any harm what so ever to anybody. Shared spaces are mainly about that, decrease in speed to increase safety.
Also back then car was absolute luxury. I will slow down for some poor folk? Nah he's not worth anything anyway.
No, having clear and easy to understand rules and regulations is always better than nothing at all. The reason they aren't followed in some countries is because they aren't enforced. Aimlessly driving in a crowd is just a disaster waiting to happen. That and it looks extremely stressful.
I agree with that completely. In my opinion, one should have to pass an open road driving test in order to renew their license.
Shared spaces intersections look like trying to drive through a Walmart parking lot on Black Friday! Cars cannot move until you try to run over some pedestrians.
How can you say that it's a disaster waiting to happen, if in every single case where shared spaces were introduced, accidents rate dropped dramatically?
They enforced an extreme amount in the US, and yet I still see crazy ass drivers on a daily basis.
We in India already use this system , even if there are light 🤣🤘
This is actually brilliant, but it relies pretty heavily on a specific set of preconditions being met:
- it only works safely in small towns or areas with low amounts of relatively slow moving traffic (both foot and vehicles)
- standard driving etiquette is observed by everyone
- all of the drivers are competent and cautious
As an US East Coast resident, I can definitively say that we satisfy literally none of these requirements. This is ideal for small towns with medieval layouts, not so much busy metropolises or towns with highways going through them.
You typed what I was going to type. Great work.
I live in Boston; this ridiculous scheme would get you killed fast!
Plenty of people don’t know the standard driving etiquette and it varies a lot by area
There are modified shared spaces now popping up in NYC, which is decidedly NOT a small town with medieval layouts (outside downtown Manhattan, that is). Plenty of cars everywhere. It seems like the shared spaces work here too.
hmmmm, this works if only some areas are shared space. drivers will be more cautious around these areas.
if everything was shared space, drivers need to be 100% alert at ALL times. it is impossible to be alert all the time, and will probably lead to accidents. ideally drivers are always alert, but being on high alert for extended periods will lead to fatigue...
i feel like this being everywhere would only be viable when self driving cars are like 80 or 90% of cars tbh. already most accidents come from driver fatigue&stress, after all.
when they say alert all of the time it is an saturation. More like keep an eye out on your surroundings like any normal road
When you drive you need to be alert 100% all the time... I really hope you don't drive.
Hawc if you read what I said, it is that nobody is 100% alert 100% of the time. That is simply not possible.
Being 100% alert for a short period of time is possible, which is what these shared spaces are thought to do.
If you could do it, that’s awesome! Sadly, my mind sometimes wander off, or I sing along with the radio in the car, thus making me not 100% alert.
3:14 Pedestrian is almost hit in the clip shown of the early 1900's, just before he says, "Vehicles couldn't go very fast back then." So now that they can go very fast, shared spaces will clearly be safer, right?
Well that's besides the fact that traffic accidents were common, they often hit pedestrians, and were hugely more lethal. People arguing for 'shared spaces' and saying "look at the early days", and then ignoring the fact that those early days quickly led to traffic rules and controlled intersections is a bit daft.
Actuality: small village shop area
Vox: Oh ThAt’s A CiTY ceNtrE
Automobiles and pedestrian pathways should be separate whenever possible. Their bedlam design is too chaotic and won't scale well for larger intersection. A circle one way intersection with yield signs works great because it keeps traffic flowing at a slow pace without chaos, but pedestrians still need more traditional control mechanisms and/or separate pathways.
Problem is, people don't care for abiding by the traffic law, and nobody cares for those around him, so these shared spaces get installed as a way for the government to say "alright, then you figure it out yourselves". What theoretically is a great idea (traffic law, all the markings, signs, regulations), turns out to be completely pointless if a person jumps the red light because he's in a hurry.
Go to any 3rd world country, hardly any road moderation .. I actually feared for my life everytime I was in a vehicle while in Cairo.
Evil I'm sorry to hear that, how many many accidents did you witness?
You bringing feared for life indicates you pay way more attention, you communicate with others, and thus safer.
Adolf Hitler I was in 2 accidents the 1 week I was in Cairo and saw numerous others, since you're clearly attempting to imply accidents aren't happening there.
How to lower crime: No laws!
Yourveryowncarrot
Exactly. 😉
Another sneaky tactic to gain favourable statistics.
There are very strict laws in Europe what to do when there is no signs. As probably most intersections in each country don't have any signs or crossings.
Also, at least in theory, pedestrian is always above cars in hierarchy. If driver hit somebody even when pedestrian should be not on road in first place it's drivers problem especially when there is sign "people or road" or "shared space".
wrong its called killing all the people doing the crime.
xYuushax 😃Death Note...great show
burningice15 WTF??? 😡🔥
It's like this in Mexico. There are a lot of close calls though. Makes me nervous.
Network126 it is the same Everyday we have close calls, but in science it is beneficial for our brain development, Just like playing a hard game with one death only.😅
The thing is you become more observant when you enter a circle because you realize your safety depends more on how you pay attention so now everyone in the circle are paying more attention to driving than they would at a normal intersection, this is why they are safer
You can't get a license if you are blind :P
Lee D
the problem is that whether its a shared space or a intersection. a blind person shouldn't be there anyway unless accompanied by another person who can see in order to direct them.
so there goes that argument.
then please tell me how would a shared space be any worse?
The shared space you showed in the beginning is just a few houndred meters from where I currently live. The first time I saw it I was confused by that sort of concept. After a while I got used to it and started to realise the idea behind all this. It actually works like a charm, all vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians watch out for each other and the quantity of accidents decreased to almost half compared to the previous roundabout.
Traffic engineer here, signalized lights are the absolute worst types of intersections other than 4 way stop sign non signalized ones.
Roundabouts are known to be better on fuel efficiency and produce less severe accidents than signalized intersections.
This shared space in theory would work best but in the USA we have trouble getting people to accept roundabouts over the perceived “safety” of a traffic light
Thomas Hallock
In Canada, Ontario at least, Roundabouts are going up everywhere. I hear people complaining about them sometimes and I don't understand it, they're way better than traffic lights. Takes less than ten seconds to get through a roundabout, but it can take literal minutes to get through One traffic light.
wschippr S in the United States less than 1% of controlled intersections are roundabouts while there’s about 1000s as many signalized ones (traffic light). Which is why people here don’t like them
I imagine it's more of an issue in cost and space of retrofitting them, rather than a question of their practicality. I was in pheonix a couple years ago, and some of the newer developments had tonnes of roundabouts. My town of 160,000 has 4.
More like 330%
Indians crossing the road: hold my lassi
Put black spray paint on everyones wind shield, that will force everyone to drive even safer.
"go back to good old days" is my fav sentence. I lol everytime. Let's go back to simpler times and live in caves or dugouts.
That'd be cool,
No political systems, no world rulers, nothing but the risk of the wild
Hulk Smash maybe, but at least it'd be a free, nature filled week
18snatan18TM I don't think you realize that political systems are not a new thing. Ancient humans and non humans such as chimpanzees have political struggle
I would like that except for the medical tech
"go back to good old days" is a reference to nostaligia and thing that we are used to.
Without exeggeration good old ways were things that worked in the past, but were banned due to new rules made by lords (driving in a left part of the street is the oldest way, but Napoleon changed it to right part of a way), or just simply forgotten (concrete was forgotten in medival, but ancient romans used it all the time) .
Make people safer, yes. Create traffic congestion, also yes. Basically half of the streets here in Jakarta are shared space, hence the traffic.
Sagacious Eagle well
I guess there's lot more to do with too many cars and less available roads
Not bcs of traffic signs
BUT
Shared place wouldnt help Jakarta either lol
More roads/less vehicle is the solution for us now
Driving attitude and law enforcement are the fundamental solution that needs to be implemented here before any infrastructure.
Sagacious Eagle hmmm
I wouldnt agree with that
While its definitely an issue that will make congestion worst
It's a symptom
Not the cause
What did you think happens
People are taking bus route to avoid congestion
Or
People taking bus route cause congestion
IMO more roads means less congestion, resulting in less law violation
About driving attitude, pls explain more about it
*self driving cars have left the chat*
Heres the issue: people are stupid and already floor it through signs. What do you think will happen when there are none?
They would in theory think that it's now more likely a pedestrian is in the road ahead/around the corner. And not floor it through *lights/signs? like they used to. Traffic lights and signs make us less observant of the actual road.
BedHeadBrum At first sure but give it less than a month and people will be back to their old habits
As a pedestrian who walked along Exhibition Road (note: *not* Kensington High Street), the cross sections usually ended up with near misses. I was almost hit 3 times in one month. The drivers would speed down the road and take the turns too quickly. They would get mad, not understanding the shared space concept, and frequently beep or shout at others on the road.
The safest place to cross /drive in is the one with slow moving traffic , everyone is cautious , no one gets to accelerate really fast over short distances which is the only major cause of confusion/accidents
As an Urban Planner in the Netherlands, Shared Space designs can be an absolute blessing. They make livability in a street way better and almost always reduce traffic accidents. Ofcourse you can't implement this everywhere. In my experience the most important factor is which vehicle category is dominant. Shared Space is best used in places where motorised vehicles are not the dominant factor, but rather pedestrians and bicycles traffic are. This forces drivers to pay attention to the slower and more 'fragile' people around them, far more so than if there were more cars then pedestrians and bicycles. Shared Space usually is implemented in and around city centres, areas where cars are kept out more and more, making way for slower traffic.
What about gas car consumption? It also depends on the pedestrian / car ratio: If their is more pedestrians it will be a nightmare for cars and time consuming, and the opposite too.
not having to wait at stop lights, even if it means going slower at intersections, seems to be an improvement in gas efficiency
but if it is like lets say New York City where it might be shorter to wait at a red light instead of waiting for all of the pedestrians to cross.
What if we got rid of roads entirely
How do you move people and goods? not everyone can walk 80 miles in a day.
*What if you got rid of zoning and made everything closer as well*
Where would cars, buses, vans etc. go?
Fastertrack *There would be no automobiles*
What if we got rid of everything
The primary function of roadsigns is to increase throughput.
You'll have to provide a lot more evidence to convince me that this could possibly have higher throughput than giving precedence to the busier street (or a roundabout).
and plus everyone is going slow cuz it's a new thing! if this is put everywhere then people are just going to start zipping though it!
@@mr.amazinggaming1153 not true. roundabouts forces you to go slow. If you blast through, you will likely slide out and also, thats the point, you can go without stopping..
@@donnie9001 but this isn't a roundabout
@@mr.amazinggaming1153 not a true roundabout but it still is, only thing missing is an island..
@@donnie9001 that's the thing that makes people slow down!
My town did this, utter chaos, even after 5 years. The problem is it is a through road, with no alternative. These things work in the right environment to low traffic, but if people have no option but to go through, then the traffic numbers stay the same and nothing is gained.
Seems would make more sense to completely eliminate cars from city center pedestrian traffic
3:54 Stop stalking me
I, a am a disabled person and I am angered, how visually disabled people could see a LIGHT, a VISUAL signal anyways? Split walkways and car streets with shared spaces to avoid accidents
the government would likely encourage people with disabilities to have companions.
This just screams no to me. Probably better to install a roundabout.
Would be nice to have data on how many people use these shared spaces in comparison to the previous layout. I would imagine that one big factor in why the accident rate dropped is because people want to dodge the unregulated areas.
Nah that's ridiculous. People won't take a completely new route to dodge one spot.
Adis Pinjic Good point. I was thinking the same.
Adis Pinjic 1:37 see that big ass truck over there? How can I feel safe to cross the street? Of course I will looking for a path with a traffic light.
We just added a round-a-bout in my community and I was talking with my grandma yesterday about how she needs to start taking it, even if she doesn't want to. She's been driving alternative routes for weeks.
They are specifically designed for high pedestrian areas in commercial areas. If anything pedestrians would increase.
The biggest factor is because they are new, and people pay more attention to things which are different.
Thank you for the explanation on 'Shared spaces' Vox, in fact, I was wondering this question myself the other day as I crossed the street. The driver in the blue car instead of slowing down at the pedestrian crossing, the driver sped up and the others from behind saw me waiting - no one slowed down for a moment. I guess if people weren't in a rush all the time, they'd be more cautious about everyone - whether you're walking, bicycling or on motorcycling.
I think the main worry for pedestrians is the idea that it depends on everyone trusting everyone else to pay attention and create compromises within a few moments time. Without signs you haves to trust peoples judgement without too much time for warning, whereas with lights and street signs you can blame it on written rules. Its sorta like falling backwards and having someone say they'll catch you on "3, 2, 1" rather than expecting when they'll be ready. Not downing this concept though, I just feel where the worry comes from.
I'm all for shared space but I think one more feature would be great. What about building bridges that pedestrians can use to cross roads without interfering with the traffic
So a shared space with separated areas for pedestrians and drivers? that totally makes sense /s
5:32 that picture is of the house of lords not the house of commons
Came looking for this comment haha
Doesn't matter. The script was talking about *both of them!*
Haha le Monke
I love how they didn’t talk about India’s road in the beginning lol
Vox: shared roads are better
Me:yes
Vox:but what about the disabled people
Me:just make shared bridges
Bridges could theoretically work for all pedestrians, not just disabled, but yeah I think it's a great idea
@@gnathp4497 thanks
Or u could just have a underground path for pedestrians
@@HeenaPatel253 that's a really good idea
I really appreciate that they put it on hold until they could improve it based on actually asking disabled people. It is so vital to include a wide variety of us in this safety conversation. As a disabled person, I would be nervous about crossing until then, because I take more time to walk and I want to be safe.
The Psychology of all this in incredibly fascinating. It is so interesting! Many things are counterintuitive. And we just stick to what we know because its what we are accustomed to. And just accepting it and rather then questioning it and finding new better alternatives. We stick to what we know even if there are other better ideas. Its sad. :(
I think the truth lies somewhere in a middle ground concept.
One thing about the signs is that people care more about followwing them...or rather not braking the rules too much, they do not pay attention to traffic. If people dod not watch theeir speed and looked out of the car to watch other cars, pedestrians, it would be much safer. That is what needs to be encouraged, culture in which people pay attention to their surroundings.
how is this better idea?
1) It forces cars to give pedestrians the right of way and travel at their speed, thus making it safer. The video detailed massive accident reductions where this has been implemented.
2) It improves traffic flow in areas with a large number of pedestrians crossing the road. Instead of concentrating pedestrian flow to one cross walk (forcing cars to wait), pedestrians can cross the road from all over the place. This allows cars to always be able to drive, even if they do it slowly, since pedestrians can walk around them.
Something you, however, need to note that wasn't stated in the video is that the shared spaces also saw a decrease in automobile traffic. The reasoning behind this has majorly been shown to a couple ideas. One is that automobiles have found new routes during the constructions of these shared spaces and thus have not fully moved back to them. Next people have discovered the slower speed of these shared spaces and the new routes they have discovered have shown to them to be faster. Thus the traffic of this area overall has stagnated and overall lower then what it was before. Thus accommodating the fact that yes there will be fewer accidents and less serious situation due to the decrease in traffic.
Marty toofree don't know either way. It would take a lot of studying. Like a panel of people do discuss the upsides and downsides of each different method.
I'm just saying its interesting how situational dynamics change a lot by changing one or two things.
What's good or bad is up for discussion. Point is, we need to have that discussion. About what is effective!! Rather then just doing things because we have become accustomed to it cuz its am old tradition or something we have done for a long time.
I'm saying there are good ideas out there that we do not take into account simple cuz we are not accustomed to it.
Have a beautiful day! :)
one thing to add is shared spaces also add character to a city. they make the city feel fresh and attract tourism. they also boost development
It seems curious to omit the collision last month on Exhibition Road London, in which 11 were injured, along the video evidence from the same road. Many press reports at the time referred to the video as 'mounting the kerb' being unfamiliar with the area, but of course there was none and it's hard to think of such a thing happening if kerbs were there. But compared to often gushing coverage this is fairly balanced.
The biggest success story here is Drachten in the Netherlands, with an 1800% drop in injuries! But they are serious and have been for decades about filtering motor traffic away from residential or city centre streets. These designs are most succesful when so few cars or buses use the area that as a driver you naturally feel 'foreign' and so overtaking cyclists or assuming pedestrians will wait is not something many drivers will do. The lesson we should draw from India (or even Poynton, those roundabouts are on the main road into Manchester) is that motor traffic naturally dominates unsegregated spaces. Where motor vehicles counts are too high, cyclists and pedestrians either need protected space, as you will see on any major road in Drachten, or measures to reduce the amount of traffic are needed, through modal filtering, narrowing, etc.
In an actually crowded area this would either end up being dangerous once people get used to it, or it will be a parking lot with people yelling and honking.
can someone correct me if im wrong, but if the statistics say it is saving lives, then why are people complaining?. is not like every street will end up without traffic lights, maybe this will be useful at some places to improve trafic. thats all...
brandon
There is obviously much more going on that they've not bothered to mention.
A wise man said to seek the truth, one must start with asking what they did not say.
I'm in a country where they have this... It's not safe
berserk guts Here in Belgium they have them everywhere, it works good in all small towns but the disabled part is a downside
They're saying there's less accidents because everyone's so stressed as they approach the intersection. Kind of like saying there's no shark deaths at a beach where they have alarms going & signs warning that a shark has been spotted & is currently swimming around 50metres offshore - of course there's no deaths if people are too scared to go into the water lol
The disabled issue, is that with a disability, your far more dependent on routine than most people & small changes can cause big problems, especially if you haven't been given advanced notice so you can plan. I get this all the time in my wheelchair - things like a footpath closed & sign saying so & directing to use the other path - but no curb ramp to get off the road & onto the footpath! A blind person first encountering this intersection is going to be looking for the pedestrian crossing, assuming it's been moved somewhere & being unable to find it. Without prior notice, it won't occur to them that they're just supposed to wander across the road anywhere they feel like! (and is that the best strategy for them? If not, what are they supposed to do?)
Saving lives. Sure. But traffic may be slower. People may take alternative routes when walking e.g with a disabled person or child. Hence less people overall taking the routes and thus less accidents.
I am visually impaired. I used to use exhibition rd but now I find it terrifying and take the long way round.
For how people already drive in New Jersey? Yeah that's a no go.
that's not really what he said you can be under the law and still dive like a maniac
Yeah people in New Jersey are some of the worst drivers
Context is important. Do not try this at a large intersection where vehicles are traveling quickly from multiple directions.
Wait a second, no speed limit signs?? WOOOO
In urban areas there is always a speed limit.
SPEED IS THE LIMIT!
So if a pedestrian gets hit who's at fault? The car or the pedestrian? If there's a car wreck who's at fault?
These "shared spaces" don't have any rules and so therefore who's at fault and who's not?
It wouldn’t be fatal accident I guess, base on how slow car can drives there.
Couldn’t there be a mix? Like a standard shared space but with some optional crosswalks with proper sound and path indicators, that activate traffic lights with only yellow and red. As someone who isn’t visually impaired I wouldn’t bother to walk to the crossing if I could legally and safely do otherwise. But for those with guide dogs or canes they can learn the paths as they do now.
This is how streets in India work (most of the time). Although people from other countries may find Indian roads too chaotic, people on streets are usually more aware.
They tried this in Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and after several serious incidents and even more traffic jamming, they turned it back. People had become just as cocky as in normal traffic situations and were speeding, cutting other people off, not paying proper attention. Also visually impaired people started avoiding these areas since they felt far too vulnerable in these grey areas of pure chaos. It's a perfect solution for low traffic flow areas (outside of the city centre), but in more busy areas it just doesn't work its magic.
This will end up with kids dying to trucks >.>
Lol, it felt like talking about the unorganized junctions in 3rd world countries in a neat way. I can now say that media is so powerful in term of viewing certain opinions.
honestly trying to cross a rlly busy intersection on a bike is so nerve racking cuz even tho the light is red drivers can turn right so u have to look for that and the opposite side of traffic is moving in EVERY direction, when those streets have something in the middle so u can go halfway at a time is rlly nice