No Street Signs

[HarleyEarl]

European cities get rid of street signs:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiege...,448747,00.html

[Flybrian]

Heh. I thought they meant directional signs.

Some of it is good in theory. Some signage is overkill, especially a few we've posted here, like then signs preluding a speed bump, indicating a road is wet when it rains, directions to watch out fo parked car, or - my favorite - the signs that tell you a traffic signal is head...even when you can see the signal lamp.

This is more retarded Old World think, though...

The road will be re-furbished in early 2007, using EU funds. "The sidewalks are going to go, and the asphalt too. Everything will be covered in cobblestones," Klaus Goedejohann, the mayor, explains. "We're getting rid of the division between cars and pedestrians."

:rotflmao:

[HarleyEarl]

Finally some sanity is actually coming in this area. Cities have become uglified by all the signage...much that is unnesessary. I hope this is adopted here.

[Croc]

Some of the logic is good, but much of it is flawed. You need some kind of order. Also, some of those warning signs are necessary, such as when there are intersections around blind curves. I do agree that getting rid of stop signs and some traffic lights in lieu of roundabouts is a good idea, but sometimes they are still necessary.

I think re-evaluating the necessity of signage in many cases is good; much of it is unnecessary. But there needs to be a middle ground...it isn't a binary of signs everywhere or none at all.

[FAPTurbo]

And here's the thing, Europe has plenty of open air markets, and open walkways where people and vehicles will mix often anyways.

However, in North America, where our cities were designed around the automobile and our driving mentality is different, I can only foresee more harm coming to pedestrians if something like this is implemented.

In my city, the money would be better spent hiring more police officers and giving them more equipment and resources to do some policing on the roads. People in my city know the rules... they just don't follow them because there's no enforcement.

[mustang84]

I agree their logic is mostly flawed. In theory, I can see what they mean by us paying more attention when there are no signs...for example, when you're driving down a residential street with no stop signs at the intersections, you generally are more observant of traffic at the cross streets and keep your speed lower.

However, on high volume streets where it's just a constant flow of traffic, signs and traffic lights are absolutely necessary. There's an intersection in Ames where I wish there was a stoplight, because every time I try to make a left turn by crossing the other lanes, I feel like I'm putting my life on the line. America was not designed for a system like this, and as captainbooyah said, it would only cause more problems for pedestrians.

There's a reason regulation came about in the first place...you're dealing with 3500 lbs of steel and glass that can reach speeds above 100 mph. Not regulating that is crazy, because not everyone is going to be courteous and cautious.

[MGZ06]

I was in Italy a month ago and noticed a huge differance in how traffic flows much better without all the signs. I wish we could do the same here, instead we put up signs and traffic lights for now reason.

[loki]

saw this article maybe 2 weeks ago...

kinda goes right along with reducing in car distractions... cause then you have to pay attention to what's going on around you and should make smarter driving decisions.

signs notifying you of things around sharp corners and other hard to see things are needed. and basic speed limits.... otherwise if you don't know how to drive, it should show up really quick!