>Right, you're talking about "traffic participant", are you including pedestrians or not?

Yes, the point of nonspecific language is in fact to be non-specific and apply to all. If I meant pedestrians I would have said that.

>Because as I said, in many places, "vehicles" and "pedestrians" are well-separated and don't impact/affect each other, so not sure what cluster-fuck could be created there. Seems less of a cluster-fuck than relying on cross-walks and stop-lights?

This is exactly the sort of garbage take the first sentence of my comment was made to apply to. Even the richest places with the most investment in traffic segregation still have a lot of cross walks and signals.