-
I know there are problems in a few places where all of the side streets have been closed creating a nice motorway effect. But keeping all side streets open in the desperate hope it might make motorists pay more attention is letting the drivers win at the expensive of massive amounts of pedestrians and cyclist comfort.
Absolutely, just because the design is novel is no reason to discount it, narrowing entries is perhaps more important than a continuous footway but both together go a long way to improve safety of cyclists and pedestrians.
If it's only a bit of resident traffic and deliveries going in and out, there's basically no issue for heavy infrastructure (although, of course, there's an industry in whose interest it is to put lots of expensive stuff in).
@Oliver Schick You can't reduce motor dominance without building your roads differently, a laisez faire hope for the best conflicts with everything we know about how humans behave. You have to separate different modes where necessary due to speed or amount, anything else is just wishful thinking that's produced nothing of note for 30 years.
You are reading a single comment by @Backstop and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Backstop
By which you mean craning your neck 180 degrees every few metres to make sure no one's about to kill you.
I know there are problems in a few places where all of the side streets have been closed creating a nice motorway effect. But keeping all side streets open in the desperate hope it might make motorists pay more attention is letting the drivers win at the expensive of massive amounts of pedestrians and cyclist comfort.
I don't think we know how well continuous pavements might work in this country - there's only a handful of them and on most we've managed to engineer some ambiguity back in.