Subject:
|
Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Oct 2001 13:16:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
552 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher Tracey writes:
> > This rule assumes that people basically are good, conscientious drivers.
Who are smart enough to know what level or risk is appropriate in all
situations. Right?
> > go out to this road and you observe traffic speeds on a good clear day with
> > good visibility and adhesion, and you set the limit to the 85th percentile
> > (such that 15% of the people are going faster than the limit)
> >
> > THAT is the correct speed for that stretch of road.
The 'correct' speed.
> > Note that this works even in residential areas, even with kids in the area,
> > as long as the "kids are in the area" signs are up... because most people
> > (2) are good drivers.
>
> Having been stuck on the futon in the living room for two days with a
> bum back I think I have a dataset showing that more than 15% of the
> people driving in front of my house are exceeding the speed limit.
What Larry is saying is that while they might be exceeding the posted speed
limit, the problem is that the posted speed limit is set wrongly. It should be
adjusted upward until only 15% of the traffic is speeding. Right?
But I'm not sure I buy it.
_Maybe_ I do if it's based on a statistical comparison of the dangers of a wide
variety of speeds on the same road. But if it's just a simplistic assumption
that people are smart enough to drive well, then I'm having some problems with
it.
> > Revenue enhancement, however, is not a valid factor for determining speed.
> > Neither are the desires of the residents of the area (assuming those "watch
> > out for kids" signs are up, that is).
>
> Agree on the first point. Totally disagree on the second. WHy
> shouldn't the residents of an area determine what the "safe" and
> desirable speed through their neighborhood?
Larry is claiming that residents of an area shouldn't 'artificially' lower the
speed limit so that they can post officers and ticket travellers-through. I
think that whoever owns the road should set the speed limits and the fines for
violating them. And I think generally that small roads should be owned by
those who own land on the road cooperatively. And I would have guessed that
Larry agreed with that. So how do we mix political issues and engineering
issues and come out with a good solution.
other Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <snip> The theory of how to set speeds isn't just some neato thing I dreamed up, it's commonly accepted practice, as outlined in Transportation Engineering texts... you can look it up or take (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
36 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
