A Flaw In Street Design May Be Costing Lives - Cheddar Explains 

I realize your joking, but the most effective way of enforcing speed limits over a given road is to make it so that you can't drive it quickly. Speed bumps are brilliant at that. You can engineer them so that traffic traveling at responsible speeds can go over them with no problems, but if they go too fast then they have issues. Obviously, in cases where people do decide to speed anyways there are issues with drivers losing control, but they do massively cut down on the speed at which drivers drive and do so consistently throughout the year at any time of day or night..

@@SmallSpoonBrigade We do actually have some decent and well designed speed bumps which don't go across the road but are designed so that buses with wider axles don't have to slow down. If you're a good driver then it's pretty easy to barely notice the bump in a car when driving at a reasonable speed.

@@SmallSpoonBrigade You also need to accept that decision also has a trade off. Speed bumps cause constant braking and accelerating and are decision points that distract a driver from other elements around them (other than the speed bump). Additionally braking and accelerating are inherently more dangerous than constant speed due to the shift in velocity and changes in weight distribution for the car, a speed bump is actually a grip hazard. This means more pollution because revving the accelerator burns drastically more fuel (plus noise), less driver concentration on their environment etc etc. The same goes for constantly changing speed limits. Ideally you want people driving at a constant conservative speed, which brings us back around to the psychological problems mentioned in the video.

@Chris L speed bumps are great for the emergency services!

Speed bumps dont slow speeders down people dont but cars anymore they buy SUVs crossovers and pickups and by the time you make a speedbump that makes a f150 slow down its impassable in just about any sports car.

Great comment.

excellent point

Maybe it's just me, but if I'm going say 30mph on one road and 30mph on another road with more parallel reference points, I still feel like I'm going 30mph. Granted, I think it requires more focus to preform at the same level, but that essentially what was stated in the video.

Very true. Roads here in the Netherlands are designed in a way that makes it feel uncomfortable when driving faster than allowed. You can feel subconsciously what the speed limits are even without a sign. If you ever get to drive here you'll no exactly what I mean

All cars have speedometer, invalid point.

*Exactly.*

So, you can't fix drivers, maybe you should think about fixing streets instead. Choosing not to fix streets when we know how, because you believe the drivers are the problem is choosing to kill people solely because you can blame someone else.

Absolutely

@@DanielBrotherston Careful not to underestimate stupidity. Idiots will find a way to cause chaos. Still, it is possible to influence the outcome of the stupidity, though.

​@Roman Hauksson-Neill Self driving cars, still programmed by humans, and still can have mechanical failures. Worst of all, they're operated by humans who may choose not to maintain them, or even choose to override their safety features. The point of safe road design is to design roads where are inherently less likely to result in death and destruction when something goes wrong. Then it doesn't matter what the driver does.

American do like their stupid big cars, so yes, they are driving tanks lol

The GM copies, Yukon, Suburban, Tahoe, and Escalade practically are tanks. Incredibly long, wide and just tanky

@@PhilliesNostalgia Denali

@@ForageGardener thanks. Is that GMC?

@@PhilliesNostalgia yeah, its GMC

Just another in a long list of things America does better.

Zeronality *agrees in NHS*

@@pennsylvaniaball9137 if you watched this video, you'd know, that this is not better 😂 And btw. I'm hooked! Tell me 3 more things from your list

@@Snokey1302 >Guns >Cheap gas >lack of "free" healthcare >big roads for big cars >Amish >The food( No, McDonald's is NOT American food. come here and visit a local diner to see real American food.)

@Zeronality I have solidarity, for both my family and my countrymen. Unfortunately, too many people in this nation are not Americans.

Hahaha

Akhil Singh Khyalia lol

And potholes! Those are very effective.

Bet your ambulances love that...

Ah....you mean active people centered streets....

I'm late, but yes. Normal walking paths on one side for dog walkers (gotta give em somewhere to "go") and edible pathways on the other. Onion greens, clover, dandilions, pomegranate hedges, blueberries, a randomly selected fruit tree every few blocks, the works.

M Detlef yea but i shouldn’t have to drive to go to a store 500 ft down the road from me because there are no sidewalks or any safe feasible patches on land for me to walk on

whacky pax people will walk regardless would you rather it be on a public sidewalk or in your private yard?

whacky pax can i see your TOEFL results?

whacky pax im 17 and definitely not a liberal lol

They thought that people would pay attention to speed limits. Naïve, I know. Anyway, if people did follow speed limits, the wider roads with better visibility would obviously be safer.

When they showed the narrow tree lined road at 5,15 thats 4 times the width if the road round here the street outside my house is wide enough for 2 cars to pass but 2 large vans or buses cant pass one has to pull off the road, its approximately 14ft wide ,some places its wider where large vehicles pass some narrower that slows traffic, it also bends and twist round greens and some of the older houses

@@daerdevvyl4314 not necessarily. Wider roads appear safer and even if drivers adhered to speed limits, perceived safety could translate to other risky behaviour such as not paying enough attention to your surroundings and using phone etc to further distract the driver. The clearance around you and the time it gives you to act don't matter if you're not paying attention. If all else equal and humans were less human wider roads likely would clearly win though.

Apparently yes.

@@daerdevvyl4314 even then it still wouldn't work because people wouldn't be watching out for other cars or pedestrians.

Its not "city planners" who design wide streets, its transportation engineers. Engineers generally only care about efficiency of traffic flow. Planners care more about community, pedestrians and livability. Unfortunately, decision-makers in cities have typically deferred to the engineers. But that's changing.

@@timmytwister6397 honestly that js what I really don't like about traditional jobs. They only want you to do what you want to do while not caring for anything else. Nowadays, it is expected to have some knowledge with the other areas of business you are working with. Sure it makes getting jobs harder, but people are becoming more intelligent (for the most part), and the benefits of at least having the knowledge variety far outweigh the drawbacks.

@@timmytwister6397 Traffic engineers are supposed to care about both efficiency and safety. It's supposed to be about getting vehicles from point A to point B as safely and efficiently as possible. The problem with the video is that there are plenty of ways of engineering a road that looks more dangerous than it is, so that the drivers will naturally sense how fast they're going and choose to drive somewhat slower without constantly looking at their speedometer. For example, rather than turning lanes of traffic into bike lanes like they've been doing in Seattle, you can make them parking lanes if you really need to. You can make sure that the sides of the streets are planted with trees that are easily uprooted in case of a vehicle crashing into them, but of a variety that will spread across the road to some extent. The city planners are morons, they go whichever way the community goes even in cases where it makes little sense to do so. State law here indicates that speed limits should be based upon the rate at which drivers actually drive. Setting the limits too low like we have in Seattle just means that more people will not take the limit seriously as the limit is clearly not related to the speed at which a car can drive, but the speed at which it's less dangerous once you've crashed. People drive more often that they crash.

@Chris L The city planners are morons, they go whichever way the community goes even in cases where it makes little sense to do so. I completely agree with you about measures like planting suitable street trees and traffic calming measures in street design where appropriate. Which was my original point. In my municipality, we have arterials, collectors, and local roads all designed by the city, but they tend to be the same width and the same speed, with zero or little traffic calming on local roads. Its a very 1970's car-centric approach where vehicles rule, and pedestrians can just deal with it. City streets are NOT just a method of "getting vehicles from point A to point B as safely and efficiently as possible", with the possible exception of arterials. Streets in residential areas, near parks, playgrounds, and neighbourhood commercial areas should use traffic calming measures to make getting around by foot, bike or wheelchair safer and more appealing. These types of streets, in particular, must be for everyone, i.e. accessible and kid-friendly. It's unfortunate that you feel "city planners are morons". It is clear that you and I have very different experiences in how streets are designed in our municipalities. In my city, the attempts by planners (city and consultants) to encourage traffic calming, even on local roads, tend to be dismissed in favour of a homogeneous road design which favours vehicles everywhere. Despite this approach, I do not feel that transportation engineers nor city officials, in my city or anywhere else, are morons.

😂

I was just thinking that! Lots of country roads are only _just_ wide enough for a single car and lined with hedges and overhanging trees. Not to mention, they are rarely straight. Still, I much prefer that to something overly sterile and manicured - in particular, I love those 'green tunnels' you get when driving through wooded areas.

@@cheapalopod8563 "road"

You should see the roads in all latin America

I'm surprised they didn't mention that

roAd

As someone who lives in a town with plenty of each type of street, I agree

james brost it’s funny because it’s totally that- trying REALLY hard not to speed. but in wide open roads it seems so hard because everyone i check my speed, i’ve somehow sped up without even meaning to

@@Ray-zy7vb what makes it hard is when you can't use cruise control to avoid speeding because it won't enable til 26mph.

Well, suddenly gaining enormous speed from being hit by a car also kills you lol.

@Al Gee Jerk, which is the derivative of acceleration, is actually what kills you

we could make a religion out of this

G

@@tylerm8128 actually the loss of blood usually kills people

Red: you pray hard there is no motorcycle, car, people, bicycle accelerating at that moment.

Malasia?

India by any chance?

Definitely somewhere within east asia

100% Italian

@C caymer Our capital, Phoenix, was settled before WWII. Of course, that doesn't account for the fact that road plans can change drastically over the span of half a century or longer.

@C caymer As all streets should be. Poor people walk and are leeches on society, rich people drive and pay taxes which pays for roads. Therefore the roads should be built to suit the people who pay for them and the poor can learn to get out of the way.

@@TheRealCartman1 Hey, hey, I'm all for social hierarchy, but you've got to remember that it's poor people who build the mansions, assemble the cars, poor the asphalt for roads, and work as groundskeepers, house maintenance, and butlers. Show them at least _some_ dignity and respect, it doesn't have to be much, but still.

Eric Cartman ever think of cyclists who are doing it as a sport or trying to stay healthy instead of sitting on their parents fortune drinking fancy wine 🤔

you guys do realize that he is probably playing the character from South Park? this is probably something he might say. Idk tho, Eric Cartman does walk a lot.

Only if you are concerned on the "what", and not the "why" and "how". Education isn't just about listing facts, but understanding.

And read by a robot......

@@Reydriel although wide roads May seem safer since they offer enough space to correct for a mistake/misjudgement, they are actually les safe as the design influences Peoples behaviour and driving to the point were drivers exceed the speed limit bye such margin that the build in "safe space" is rendered insufficient make the roads inherently more dangerous.... There you go. The what, why and how..simple and Without going on and on about the same thing over and over again.. Op has a point is what im trying to say...

There's quite a bit more substance in the video than that. Sure, what you've summarized may be a good answer for the title, but that kind of delivery is half as enlightening and much less impactful, similar to how people just gloss over their speedometer and speed on instinct. The paradox mainly applies to streets, not roads, by the way.

@@squeakybunny2776 You missed all the history as to HOW it got to this point in the first place. Besides, if everything was written as summaries it would be extremely boring.

Fucking trash

That is how the Dutch design small roads.

@Bob Marly Same could be said for these "safer" roads. They are more prone to accidents which cause traffic, and deaths.

My hometown has a residential street so wide that I’ll bet you could fit 20 cars side by side. With no lines seperating it into lanes, and almost no traffic. It’s glorious.

@@daerdevvyl4314 lmao what city?

I'd bet the majority of drivers here have had a moment where they regain focus and realize they've driven quite far either half-asleep or otherwise much less aware. I find those moments terrifying and I'm thankful both that I'm still alive and that I haven't killed anyone.

@@purbass Are you sure about the second one? Maybe you've been too tuned out to notice? Just kidding. I know exactly what you're talking about.

I've done it for years. I call it auto pilot. Ill be tired at night work done home time contemplating something. Arrive 500 ft from home and realize I don't remember the ENTIRE ride. But I know if something was different...tree down...car coming at me out of control...anything that could lead to a bang up...I'd "come to" right away and most times react in time.

The solution is to remove the human brain from the equation. Let the self driving car handle driving on wide, straight, safe streets. You can play angry birds.

yan-Deriction, those cars need to have fully autonomous and fully manual modes. All these cars with the super safety features that do most of the driving are training drivers to not pay attention. They can pass all the laws about keeping your hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, but that won’t change the human brain’s tendency to not focus on things it doesn’t perceive as threats.

RicoGalassi what the fuck... it doesn’t seem like it when your doing 75

@@staticbeans I think that's the point, because our perception of distance is skewed while traveling fast it lets us easily maintain following distance and awareness of short range distances

Ian M Burke exactly: the French implement this logic in their Autoroutes

@@staticbeans get on your car right now and please try it at 130 and above. it starts looking like a straight line with no cuts. pls go try it

Channing Laurens LOL

You mean those crazy zig-zag shoulder markings I see sometimes on Brit dash cams?? Those... WORK? In the US we'd just take one look, say 'WTF?' and drive right over them.

(I believe) White zig zags are officially to indicate 'strictly only stop for traffic lights or to yield'. You see them at pedestrian crossings mostly. They also might help to slow down motorists at these areas, but I don't actually know. Yellow zig zags can be found outside schools and hospitals and other such priority places, and they are basically double yellows on steroids, 'strictly no stopping/parking' as it can be dangerous or restrict needed access to other road users such as ambulances or people crossing. They are often accompanied by a sign that says no stopping and the hours and such.

Another interesting phenomenon that was discovered by accident is the effect having evenly spaced lines across the lane or along the side of the road (including from things like trees) can help lower speed. Though in this case by making drivers more aware how fast they are going, giving the eye regularly spaced fixed references allows us to judge speed better and since we tend to underestimate rather than overestimate drivers tend to feel they are driving faster with references than left to judge without a clearly defined external reference point.

Following, I would also like to know the name of that village.

Classic council

Phlegethon right that’s the main issue

Streets without sidewalks make sure that the cars have to make way for the pedestrians and not the other way round. I live in an area without sidewalks (except on main roads obviously). And i always feel safer on the streets here. I can walk in the middle of the road if i want and the cars have to stop or slow down. Roads without seperation of pedestrians, cyclists and cars have been statistically proven to be a lot safer that roads with seperate lanes for each

Kristian l this is not true. It has been proven that lines on the street separating the road for cars and pedestrians isn’t safer. Sidewalks with an elevated platoon is safer. Feeling more safe when walking in the middle of the street vs walking on a sidewalk is ridiculous

@@AntiKiwieCS As i said this is ofcourse not the case on busy main roads, but on small residential roads shared space environments have been proven (although, i admit, it has not been extensively studied yet) to reduce accidents.

Wait, someone is actually going on foot in the USA? I didn’t notice that 😃

Wardex no, no, no. Now RU-vid will recommend you other videos similar to this one

Tap the three dots next to the thumbnail. Select not interested. Voi la! You tube stops recommending it.

@@digiscrappin no it still will.

Bucks 2020

@@digiscrappin Not before RU-vid re-recommends it later tonight.

I mean im Damn sure NOT driving down this highway with 15mph :b

@Zwenk Wiel It's in part due to commercial and residential zoning laws designed around the car, meaning it's almost impossible for a lot of suburban Americans to simply walk somewhere to carry out a simple errand like buying milk.

@@jaredbowhay-pringle1460 yah that milk on foot is only 5 miles away through 100 properties. But by car it's 25 miles away as one has to loop onto an avenue. It is a serious problem

@Zwenk Wiel The argument in short (and yeah it's a legitimate academic argument) is that because suburbs are so spaced out in the US you are more or less forced to drive everywhere for everything, whereas in cities it's too cramped and difficult to drive so it's easier to just walk out our front door and walk down to the shops or to take public transport. Ergo cities inadvertently force you to walk more due to their extremely obstructing design to cars and proximity of places favours walking. Suburbs achieve the inverse, it's so easy to drive, it's often too far to walk, providing public transport services is just that much more difficult with more area and lower population density to cover. Edit: So yeah you're essentially right, it is because of shit diet and little exercise, but the issue is exacerbated by inconvenient planning and design making it that much more of a pain to walk rather than drive. For instance, I live in Australia, not the US, but I live about a 25-minute walk from the shops, about a 5-7 minute drive, if I obey the speed limit. Mind you, I don't have a car at the moment so I skateboard to the train station nearby and catch that to work, but when a shopping trip is a 45 minute round trip venture on foot and you're limited to what you can comfortably carry, you're sort of forced by inconvenience and your own laziness to just drive. When I used to live in a small CBD I lived in an apartment across the road from the shopping mall. From the door of my apartment on the third floor to the entrance of the actual supermarket store within the mall, it was barely a 5-minute walk - I'd happily carry as much as I could hold through the shops, across the road and up 3 flights of stairs. If I only needed a couple of things? Well, I was laughing. Had I driven, despite the fact that it would be laughable to drive when I literally lived across the road, it would have taken me a solid 10 minutes at least once I negotiated 2-3 sets of traffic lights and weaved through underground parking. I actually did some quick calculations and found out that within that small CBD if you wanted to travel from any point to any point, if it was a 15-minute walk or less, it was far easier to just walk and forgo traffic, traffic lights and parking complications. I later lived further away from the shops a year and a half later, despite the increased distance, it was only about a 10-minute drive still, though about a 20-minute walk. If it was a nice day, I was still better walking from my apartment to the shops that driving through the shitty CBD, so long as I wasn't in a hurry. So there's a little context for you to help understand why 'suburb planning' makes people fat.

@@Mr539forgotten It depends on the population of the area, my county is flooded with people and we often walk to the nearest bus or train.

@Zwenk Wiel The second part of your question, answers your first! If you're 50 miles away from the nearest store, are you going to walk there by foot, or take the car? Chances are, you'll exercise less in a suburb because things aren't close enough to where you could spend time walking to and from a store (in the same time as driving the 50 miles takes). As for the diet, it's hard to sustain small businesses in areas with nothing but roads, and American zoning laws don't let businesses set up near homes. So the only types of businesses that can survive are fast food- shitty, made quickly (bad quality) and cheap (again, sugar and fat are super cheap in the U.S.). That's why Americans are so fucking fat. It's not their fault, but conservatives insist that it's you're fault that there's no healthy restaurant that you can walk to on a weekly basis, instead of rushing through a Denny's drivethrough. Oh, and most American foods are packed with sugar. Even things imported from Europe (hamburgers for example, will have shitloads of cheese, bacon, deepfried onions and sugary sauces) are turned into monstrosities. It's sad really. Such a proud nation, yet so many problems no one is willing to admit even exist.

Zach Shipstead its even better easier to experience speed by looking at a freakin speedometer

Yo Daddy I disagree with you and agree with the other guy.

@@yodaddy4944 If you go looking at the speedometer, you won't see the pedestrian crossing 5 meters ahead of you.

@@Nearthel We do not even need speedometers you look at, modern cars can be equipped with GPS to tell you the limit and when you go over it... most drivers do not speed because they do not notice, they do so because they "feel" it is safe to break the law...

@@kathrinlindern2697 I've never had a GPS that tells me the speed limit, much less a car that has one built in.

KA l it’s probably easier to learn here though. The wide lanes are great for me.

@@sks17873 with here you mean the US I guess?... From what I heard it's much easier to learn driving in the US but at which cost that's the real question... Most Americans can't drive a manual and are anxious when they drive more than 60mph (at least that what's a mate told me after his year abroud)

@@kal3198 Well, you kind of have to drive more than 60 mph on the freeway/highway, while 30-45 mph on streets/roads.

@@anncokafor I can only quote from what I heard from my mate. He told my a few years ago that the kids who got they license with 16 (by the way impossible in Germany) are very anxious and don't really know how to drive and get quite nervous when they drive on the highway and need to drive over 60mph. I don't really know anything more but I'm not a big fan of the way the driving schools are handled in the US. But this maybe is more a cultural thing.

@@anncokafor what do you thing we germans drive on high & freeways ... freeways up to 80m/h & highways goes past infinity

Well hers why that won't work.... I use them as ramps, I drive straight across when I can/people don't know how they work(thank God because they suck), street lamp I use to spot cops, and I've seen people drive on them before....

It seems like this video is mostly focusing on residential streets. Speed bumps and street lamps tend to be avoided in large numbers in residential areas because they lower the property value by being a pain in the ass to the people who live there, and the main demographic being targeted at families with kids. Prospective home buyers don't want their entire street brightly lit at night making it hard to sleep, and speed bumps are both aggravating to people having to drive over them every day, and an issue for emergency vehicles trying to quickly get to a house. Sidewalks tend to vary by place, but oddly enough they're an actual thing house buyers avoid when looking for a home, and lots without them tend to be more attractive in the real estate market. And as for roundabouts, those are an entirely different issue of the US fighting tooth and nail to avoid installing them because they just hate them for some reason.

@@Potassiumkloride speed bumps and street lamps are the norm in residential areas in the country I'm from. Especially cause there's kids in those areas

Speed bumps are failures for two main reasons: 1) People use the space between them to travel at an increased rate of speed, and 2) they slow down emergency response vehicles

@@Potassiumkloride round abouts cause a lot of accidents, too. This intersection near me that had maybe 1 deadly crash every 1-3 year's was changed to a roundabout and now has about 2-5 small fender benders a month. Granted there hasn't been a single death or hospital visit caused by an accident there since it was put in. But it causes way more accidents than it ever had in the past.

I've spent about 20 years of my life in Australia and the vast majority of suburban roads (which this is about) are tiny cramped things. They tend to be a bit wider in country towns, but there's plenty of very cramped roads in those too. I've lived in Sydney, Brisbane, Darwin, Adelaide, Melbourne, Ballarat, Cooma, Cobar, Byron Bay, Alice Springs, Ballina and a bunch of other places besides, and I really can't think of too many examples of 'wide' suburban streets. Main roads, sure. But main roads are main roads, and that isn't what the video was about. If anything I've seen a proliferation of roundabouts, 40 km/h speed limits, endless speed bumps, and extremely narrow roads that would count as single lane roads if there's cars parked there, which there almost always are. Australia's suburban roads largely resemble European ones most of the time. (I've spent 8 years living in the UK and a similar time in the netherlands, so I certainly have a point of comparison for that.) Australian roads in general, rather resemble british ones. Roundabouts everywhere, narrow streets mixed with wider ones rather haphazardly... I'm really not seeing what you're referring to, unless you're thinking of some exceptionally recent trend (like in the past 5 years or less.) If anything, the roads keep getting windier, narrower, and with more and more roundabouts and vicious speed bumps all over...

Because the EU design is ugly as shit

I have found that in new residential estates the roads are quite narrow and there is a conscious effort to make the area more friendly to other modes of transportation. But in established areas, they are getting a lot of pushback from residents and motorists when changed which make it safer for everyone get proposed because "but my street parking!" and similar reasons.

I love older neighborhoods with narrow streets. They have so much more character and charm than the mass produced tract housing that they've been building for many decades in the US now.

KuraIthys, wow! You've been fortunate to live in so many gorgeous places. I'm envious.

Redhead is also included there

If you walk on the left side in right driving countries or on the right side in left driving countries, you’ll be safe.

@@daerdevvyl4314 Bullshit. Sorry, but that's just bullshit. It's even more bullshit when the only road between your house and the nearest five bus stops is basically a highway and doesn't have crosswalks within 1000 feet of your shitty, steep driveway. No, I don't live in the boonies; there are traditional American-style suburbs right across the street and three major transportation hubs within ten miles of my house. The only reason this stupid road doesn't have a sidewalk for the large stretch I'm forced to walk on to get anywhere is because of the highway status.

Rcbif I actually like that.

I just crank up the playback speed in the settings, and problem solved.

The pacing is done this way on purpose.

@@amzarnacht6710 - well it sounds dumb, like she's reading her script off a text message on a phone.

It's a trick used to make people listen.

mrbarneystinson100 hey Barney. How’s your daughter?

Looks like we've got a badass over here boys

Madlad

1.50x

I hope you didn’t hit any pedestrian pixels!

Talking about the history that lead up to that 'oh, derp!' moment.

Thank you!

Video also says much of the increase in traffic fatalities is among pedestrians and cyclists. Sounds like they need to stay off the effing road where the cars are at.

thank you cause i desdass couldn't focus

unfortunately it's because in the US if you're not driving they think you're too poor to matter.

What are you talking about, I’d say 90% of residential streets have sidewalks

@@kickandblock really? Just search up American residential street on Google and all you see is the actual road, cement driveways and grass

Because the roads are mainly meant to be driven on, or walked for very short distances (From bus/train station to house, and back).

Most residential streets close to big boulevards and common transport do have sidewalks

SilverMoon925 are you too ignorant to do the math

They thought you were smarter than us Americans and could do the math yourself. Clearly they were wrong. It's the other way around, it seems...

I'd like to enjoy the video, not sit down and do pointless maths just to understand the video. What's wrong with keeping both systems on the video? Cheddar wants views. There are 6.7 billion of us who use metric and 300 million of you who use US customary units. Welcome to the Internet. This video isn't exclusively yours.

"​@That guy " What? That made no sense. English please.

@@LoganDark4357 Right...... Not wanting to pause the video to check the maths to understand the video is a sure sign of intelligence. It's CERTAINLY not possible that some of us might just want to sit down and enjoy. Right?

Taylor Bertrim how original.

@@inquiry1346 it's actually from Top Gear that's why I said "we all know".... Sorry I wasn't creative enough for you.

Taylor Bertrim I thought you were trying to make it seems like you invented the quote.

its literally the kinetic force wich kille you

and you are more likely to suddenly stop if you speed.

Indeed, it's not the roads, it's the incompetent drivers who don't know how to control a motor vehicle. As a competent driver myself, I resent being forced to go slower than necessary just to accommodate the idiots who shouldn't be driving in the first place.

I even had my car's mirror on driver side collided with other car's mirror due to narrow, straight road. I mean, WTF, the road is not planned well because no one predict that the vehicle become so large like today.

that's what most people do already at least here in Portugal. although that intrinsic speed is going to be changed by driver's accostumation, the feel the car gives (bigger cars = more filtered = apparent speed goes down). Overall we'd be back at the same thing.

@@miaugato93 Also depends on whether the driver has some sort of education in road engineering. I doubt most people understand all the factors that go into deciding a speed limit.

@@yanDeriction over here its random. a road was designed to handle 100km/h just had its limit reduced to 70km/h enforced with camera. for no apparent reason.

Yes, people do not drive according to the posted limit, they drive according to their comfort. Which is a good thing. Speed limits are backwards thinking. The only time people check their speedometers are when they see a cop. Which takes their eyes off the road. A cop's presence alone makes accident rates skyrocket. And their flashing lights at night with pulled over vehicles is super dangerous. You ever wonder why there are so many cop dash cam recordings of the police car being rear ended at a traffic stop on a highway? It's because the lights dazzle people and they target fixate on it. Cops switching their lights to being just a static red and blue would reduce accidents drastically.

Julian once fully autonomous cars are the norm then we will see multiple revolutions in transportation, including the rise of single passenger cars that are roughly 1 meter wide and also the segregation of roads for cargo transportation vs passenger transportation. While it will likely be a long time before existing streets are rebuilt I imagine that new residential subdivisions will be built to accommodate the new reality.

The internet GPS goes out on one car - what happens?

@@Defensive_Wounds it stops

Defensive Wounds autonomous vehicles will probably also communicate with each other locally for collision avoidance among other redundancies.

Softy my thoughts exactly. The tech isn't perfected but it's already shown to be much more reliable than even the best human drivers.

Drinking boozy

DrDewott hej med dig

American here, my neighborhood is older and doesn't have this design, but I've drove through ones with these super wide streets. There were legitimately times I ran stop signs cause the sign was so far out from my field of vision that I completely missed it (and being unfamiliar with the area didn't help)

You'd get to your destination quicker going on bike. It would be better for the environment too given your circumstances

What's up fellow enthusiast

I thought European roads were narrow, then I took a bike tour around Japan and I finally understood why some Japanese cars were so tiny.

No, it's the complacency too. If the driver feels too safe they get inattentive and don't react to potentially dangerous situations.

That's pretty good English, for a dog.

Zenn Lozanno I’m having a stroke, sorry bro

It’s a cat for me but same reasons

hi doggie

C caymer you must have never visited Mexico. In the US, those speed bumps are nothing. In Mexico, if you try going fast at a speed bump, your car will be destroyed lol and they are in close proximity too

Speed bumps?? Tell that to my Ford Bronco 😂😂😂 My truck EATS speed bumps for breakfast!!

@@wooferjr169 Sppedbumps still sucked when driving a Hilux in Mexico.

@@wooferjr169 No dude you don't understand. Mexican speed bumps are no joke.

Speed bumps kill though, both through causing accidents to drivers unaware of them, and through delaying of emergency services. While you do want a driver to act carefully, you want them to do so in a passive way, and introducing obstacles and changes to the road surface will only make a driver focus more on what the road is going to be like, than any opposing traffic or pedestrians that may potentially cross.

Most people say you're the best.

I'd take a girthy A-pillar over getting crushed when my vehicle rolls...

Also too sound proof. I don't like driving in the City with closed windows. I call it Audi-o-vision.

Or just, ya know, pay attention when driving. Especially when closing to pedestrian crossing.

Would you prefer the pedestrian dying or yourself dying when your vehicle rolls or an animal hits your windshield.

Agreed. I love my 1999 Subaru because it's like driving in a fishbowl. I can actually see out of the thing whereas newer cars seem to rely on sensors

Meh. I'm sure he ment well, but he was also wrong about stuff

@@oofyeetmcgee Exactly. Intentions aren't enough if your facts or conclusions are wrong.

He was only wrong in this ONE part. What about everything else?

New York Public Interest Research Group aka NYPIRG, for instance.

New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, San Diego, even Los Angeles, Etc... are cities you should think about relocating to.

@@CityLifeinAmerica Adding DC and Boston to the list.

I'm not even from the U.S guys.

@@victorrsouz oh, ha, apologies. RDJ and SP have pretty respectable transit systems, although Europe and Asia clearly outrank those of us in the Americas.

@RedLight GreenArrow I have lived in San Francisco before and the public transportation sucks. They do have a large network of busses and trains, but there way too many people who take the bus and train to work/school. They don’t have enough busses and trains to meet the needs of the people. That’s why I moved to New Delhi in India where they have a fast, modern, and clean metro system that goes around in all the areas of the city and I can get to work super fast without driving , plus there are lots of seats in the trains, so you basically never have to stand up.

I read an article about a michigan cop reviewing speed limits on roads and increasing them in nearly every case. he determined that peoples' speed is determined by how dangerous they feel a road is. on a big flat straight interstate people will go 80 when the speed limit is 50 because there's no reason not to. on a windy mountain road people will go way slower than the posted speed limit in some parts because of the inherent danger of the road, just like this video said. when there are obvious dangers, people will accommodate

nader was no help by the time he wrote the bood the corvair problem was already fixed. hi group was the one who got darvon products banned and the fda then told doctors to prescribe oxies. and it was always said he did no research of his own

That is because DoT didn't debunk his book. While it's oft cited, what DoT showed was that the Corvair was not more dangerous than other vehicles at the time in a statistically meaningful way. However, those findings supported Nader's premise, which was that nearly every vehicle on the road was significantly more dangerous than they needed to be. He used the Corvair as the model of "unsafe" but his book is critical of both American and Foreign cars. The statistics that matter, that DoT also produced in the late 70s when they "disproved" Unsafe at any Speed, was the significant difference in fatalities and serious injuries in vehicles following the implementation of seat belts, padded dashboards, and collapsible steering wheels. When looking at the same kind of accidents when comparing a car from 1963, vs a car from 1973, fatalities and serious injuries plummeted. Also, as automakers, thanks to the book, engineered significant changes in suspension and balance, accidents per driving mile saw a decrease. It's also worth noting that this video inaccurately suggests Nader was talking about building wide suburban roadways. A cursory look through his testimony and through his book suggested that he believed the engineering should have taken place through the vehicle, not the roadway.

@@DCLocal84 You seem to know a lot about this. I am looking to cite some research, (not academically , but in a design proposal) that says what this video is saying. Do you know of a book or researcher I can quote when I saw that a wide open street is not the best choice in the design I’m proposing? Thanks.

@@thomashart3487 a lot of the best research I've read through has come out of major universities. Ones you expect, like Harvard. And maybe a few you wouldn't, like Arizona State. I'm not sure that I know a singular source that you should cite. However, I do think a very good source would be Jeff Speck. He wrote walkable city and Suburban Nation. His understanding is a bit less safety oriented, and more pedestrian oriented from an economics point of view. Lastly, there is some really great research that has come directly out of the NTSB and DoT as a whole. I hope this was helpful in some manner.

Ditrix Genesis what is tl dr

To long; didn't read Usually for articles or FB paragraphs or whatever, but can be applied anywhere

Ross Moir that’s merely because it’s a small area in comparison to the US.

ok

there's a village near me that they never changed the road plan ever since medieval times, they just paved over. Apart from a "big" two lane road that used to be an interregional connection back in the 70's, you don't really drive faster than maybe 20km/h. Most of the time you're driving 15 km/h. other thing that it's popular in my country is speed bump crosswalks. They raise the crosswalks so that a) it's level with the sidewalks, +1 for disability access, b) a car needs to slow down or it'll be flyin and breaking stuff. Of course, the governments didn't predict that would generate an increase in SUV's...because the high curb height negates the desired effect. an insurging thing that's very popular with the safety crowd but being overused and breaking flow of national routes, is the roundabout. Over here every single cross road or t-section is being replaced with roundabouts. Great for safety and general flow, but it's a pain because you change rhythm more frequently, which generates tiredness, fuel expenditure, pollution, and some say it doesn't solve the problem because the safety gained by deleting cross and t-sections is lost because people trying to average and therefore driving slower, sometimes way slower than normal traffic, are constantly overtaken by speedy gonzaleses that then sometimes headbutt the incoming traffic generating fatalities. so yeah...traffic safety is a complicated matter.

There's a real problem with speed bumps: They also slow down emergency vehicles, particulary ambulances with loaded patients. Reactionary speed bumps that can be lowered do exist but are more expensive. A good alternative are those street signs that show your current speed and a smiley face when you're slow and a sad face when you're too fast. They're everywhere where I live, especially in 30 km/h zones around schools, kindergartens and hospitals.

I live in Europe and this doesn’t slow me down I go with my huge truck and I don’t even feel those speed bumps no matter if I’m speeding 😂😂😂

^ see what i meant?

To me they seem very boring and empty. A place you go to sleep and rest, if you want anything else - jump in a car and drive at least 2 miles to nearest Megamallmart.

I don't like that living in suburbs forces you to use a car if you want to go anywhere. They usually don't even have good transit options if you want to walk/not drive. @@FlymanMS

Yeah my street is so narrow that two cars can barely pass each other and has blind corners. There's a tourist site at the end of it though so there's a constant stream of people trying to crash into each other every day. Tourist p-platers... There's a special class of humanity.

The real solution is to get rid of the need to drive, working on public transit systems and shorter walking times and better city planning. But no, "muh freedumb" dictates that to go to the grocery store next to your neighborhood is a 5 mile drive because we need to build walls to stop people just directly walking to the store, and instead have to go around in a huge circle.

Sherrif public transportation works, but shorter walking times doesn’t, especially more suburban/urban areas. Making everything in short walking distance becomes increasingly difficult or inefficient

4 way stop seems best way to cause crashes (but even with traffic lights you still get people who just don't care and run a red light at a 4 way) only one road should of priority, the one with trees should be the one that is unsafe but seems very odd that people just assume its clear and go

[this comment I’m about to type is a joke] Safer until newly-licensed daredevils start swapping the “h” in “humps” with a “j” in “jumps”

Then it’s not the road but the drivers. Maybe the solution would be harder to get driver’s license.

mamafaker50 it was the street with fewer accidents, because it wasn't as 'safe'. If everyone would be perfect and hold to the speed limit, the first street would actually be safer :)

@@samuvisser i should have asked the question like this, what is the name of the second street in the example? It looks asthetically pleasing.

The second one is safer, because it forces drivers to be more aware passively. It also has the benefit of using dirt as runoff material rather than asphalt, which in combination with ditches pretty much keeps the car from flying off the road way in normal circumstances.

Jesus Christ, guys, he's just asking what the street is called. He's seen the video, he knows it's safer.

In the second street drivers have to pay more attention and feel less safe, which causes them to drive more safely. It is the safer street design.

It's not crazy, the people driving on it are, Swindon resident here

Shaun Hunkin lol... people are crazy

I think they expect that the advances in car design will reduce injuries in those type of wrecks, a basic 2500 lb coupe today maintains the passenger compartment, and keeps occupants from flying around inside better than the 2 ton, 4 door land yachts of the 1960's did.

The video was well put together and offers extra insight into the "why" without going overboard. If it was 20 minutes long I could understand the complaint, but to complain about 4 more minutes of content is childish. Which you could've easily skipped if you believe your time is that valuable.

Dottie_Lima Really? Because the bit at 3:28 explains WHY it was necessary to include the information on Nader. In fact, it's the crux of the whole argument.

History is important This video was only 7 minutes Thats not very long at all

round abouts are ideal for that space allowing

I . . . can't really say I agree with something this extreme. Interestingly, though, this does remind me of something my dad says about head injuries in football -- that if they took the faceguard off, the players would do a much better job of protecting their heads without a huge increase to their risk of serious injury or death.

@@eyesofthecervino3366 ... Which is exactly how it works in rugby.

@@juliahenriques210 Does it work?!?

somewhere in southeast asia ?

Good for you.

Why?

Fill the roads with over engineered cars where components seem to start failing around 150,000km?

@@AMD1 Deutsche Qualität ; )

Joshua Huston - Retired CM/planner here - are you a developer or an engineer - just curious as I understand your comment totally?