[sustran] shared space
Eric Britton
Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org
Thu Nov 30 02:49:50 JST 2006
It sure is called "Motor Mania" David and others -- and if you want to
check it out you will find it in our little informal "Old Mobility
Evidence (Oops)" video library, fourth from left at
http://www.youtube.com/groups_videos?name=oldmobility
<http://www.youtube.com/groups_videos?name=oldmobility&page=2> &page=2
And BTW, it ain't funny.
Eric Britton
From: LotsLessCars at yahoogroups.com [mailto:LotsLessCars at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of David Nicholson
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 1:36 AM
To: LotsLessCars at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [LotsLessCars] shared space
I have seen the Disney film - it was called "Motor Mania" and I think it
was produced in the late 1950's.
-----Original Message-----
From: LotsLessCars@ <mailto:LotsLessCars%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com [mailto:LotsLessCars@
<mailto:LotsLessCars%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford
Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2006 2:01 AM
To: LotsLessCars@ <mailto:LotsLessCars%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [LotsLessCars] shared space
Hi
This discussion about the psychology of traffic and driver behaviour is
an interesting one and an area I have often thought neglected in
literature. I wonder if there is much serious research around about
perceptual distortions etc in relation to cars and car dependence. It
strikes me that there is a social addiction to motor vehicles at present
and this has all sorts of implications.
Chris Bradshaw's suggestion below reminds me of an idea I have often
thought would be effective - the penalty for speeding ought to be
wheel-clamping, or some such immobilisation, for a couple of hours
rather than a fine of some sort. People who speed are putting their own
perceived desire for speed ahead of others wellbeing - and particularly
for the better off may value this time more highly than a financial
penalty. Far better I think to impose a penalty where it is their own
value of time that is deducted.
I also wonder if anyone recalls the details of the famous Walt Disney
film about how Goofy is transformed from mild-mannered individual into
angry driver simply by entering a car.
Best wishes
Roland Sapsford
Wellington, New Zealand
Chris Bradshaw wrote:
> From: Carlos F. Pardo SUTP
>
>
>> Great question. I think we lose our ability to negotiate traffic when
>> we're going too fast (e.g. above 30 km/h). That's when (and why) we
>> need other measures. But you're right, there are sometimes too many
>> stop lights. I think we shouldn't be at any of the two opposite ends
>> of enforcement vs "live and let live".
>>
>
> This is indeed the missing factor. Higher traffic speeds is the goal
> for the engineers who have added traffic controls to city streets.
> When you propose shared spaces, you are proposing a "naked street," a
> street lacking these controls.
>
> As speed increases, formalities of interaction are necessary. In a
> world where speeds do not exceed walking (which was the case in cities
> before the advent of railed transit), no traffic controls are
> necessary. Everyone road user can simply look out for their own way,
> and thereby are looking out for others' welfare simultaneously. And,
> there are no "separators" such as tinted windshields to add anonymity
> (which reduces the sense of accountability and guilt for collisions).
>
> Remember, the growth in automobility is paralleled by the growth in
> average speed. Traffic controls was the focus. And any reference to
"safety"
> really meant that the objective was higher speeds. The price one is
> willing to pay for a car is directly proportion to the expected speed
> it car be driven -- as well as how often.
>
> Where are the treaties where walkers gave up their right to
> governments and their road engineers to walk wherever, and to do so
> without the contrived obstacles of traffic controls (and the "safety"
justification for same)?
>
> Chris Bradshaw
> Ottawa
>
> p.s., I have proposed for some time that a motorist who strikes a
> pedestrian or cyclist, regardless of fault, should lose the right to
> drive for as long as the vulnerable road user is unable to resume the
> mode of transportation they were using at the time of the collision.
> If that person dies, the driver faces a lifetime driving ban.
> (Ironically, the deprivation the ensues is lessened in one lives in a
> city with good transit.)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20061129/894f9ebe/attachment.html
More information about the Sustran-discuss
mailing list