Traffic deaths continue to soar despite cities' pledges to get them to 'Zero'

[cpzilliacus]

Washington Post: Traffic deaths continue to soar despite cities' pledges to get them to "˜Zero'

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser stood in the heart of Union Station on Feb. 20, 2015, and promised to lead the nation's capital into an era free of traffic fatalities.

"We are taking our first step toward realizing a "˜Vision Zero' where no lives are lost on our streets or at our intersections,"  said a newly elected Bowser, setting a goal of zero road deaths by 2024.

Instead, the number of traffic fatalities has steadily increased since then, frustrating city officials and advocates, and seemingly putting the goal further from reach.

[cpzilliacus]

No surprises here.  The District of Columbia has an unstated policy  of only enforcing its traffic laws through automated devices, and drunk/impaired drivers seem to only get arrested if they crash into someone or something first. 

And in many municipalities, Vision Zero has been hijacked by anti-highway and anti-auto ideology, which not doing anyone any good.

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah, I don't know how they can think they can stop all fatals, when something like driving at the posted speed limit contributes to extremely few accidents, much less fatal accidents.  They need to see exactly how all fatals are occurring, and go directly after every one of those reasons. 

[SectorZ]

Yeah, I don't know how they can think they can stop all fatals, when something like driving at the posted speed limit contributes to extremely few accidents, much less fatal accidents.  They need to see exactly how all fatals are occurring, and go directly after every one of those reasons.

The problem is the government goes after low-hanging fruit in this country, be it the actual cause of the problem or not, and is good at getting a gullible segment of the population to go along with it. Especially a bigger problem in cities.

[kalvado]

Yeah, I don't know how they can think they can stop all fatals, when something like driving at the posted speed limit contributes to extremely few accidents, much less fatal accidents.  They need to see exactly how all fatals are occurring, and go directly after every one of those reasons.

Another problem is that most traffic fatalities are one of a kind events, and it is difficult to get statistically significant trends.
Drunk driving, of course, is one of those clear cut issues - but it is also aggressively addressed.
A lot of avoidable problems are due to "I didn't see" and "I didn't notice" type situations -  but the way distracted driving is addressed, net result is probably going to be negative. And something like mandating reflective clothing elements for pedestrians would be a no-go with many groups (probably because it would make drug sellers more noticeable?). At least some of those issues are going to be helped with rear view cameras and all of blind spot-proximity warnings.
I hear a lot of stories that engineering measures reducing accidents elsewhere - noticeably, grade separated crosswalks - are no-go in US. Well, price is there to pay...

[Brandon]

Let's also not forget the issue of distracted walking.  It's way too easy to have one's head in a phone instead of noticing the signals and the traffic (of all kinds) around.

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah, I don't know how they can think they can stop all fatals, when something like driving at the posted speed limit contributes to extremely few accidents, much less fatal accidents.  They need to see exactly how all fatals are occurring, and go directly after every one of those reasons.

The problem is the government goes after low-hanging fruit in this country, be it the actual cause of the problem or not, and is good at getting a gullible segment of the population to go along with it. Especially a bigger problem in cities.

Yep. 

But until they start going after the actual problem rather than just what sounds good in the media, they won't resolve the issue.  Even in cases involving alcohol - If a drunk hits a jaywalking pedestrian, both are at fault, but the blame is largely put on the drunk.  Heck, because the article said 'alcohol', it convers that the driver was drunk.  The pedestrian could've been the one drunk, and the accident was at fault of an intoxicated person...but again, it's not broken down as to who was actually the one that was drunk.

Note that actual numbers are rarely given, and actual numbers that show pedestrians are at fault are absolutely never given. 

We see it on these boards also - bicyclists and pedestrians take every opportunity to shift the blame away from their actions and onto driver's actions.  Reading the article, at one point someone said a pedestrian crosswalk cycle is too short.  While that may or may not be true, there was nothing elsewhere within the article, or anywhere else for that matter, to say that short crossing cycle has contributed to any accidents or deaths.  It's another example of shifting the blame around, and allows the actual problem to get worse, not better.  They can spend billions making intersections safer for pedestrians, but if the pedestrian decides to walk midblock, the safer intersection did nothing to prevent that death.

[Rothman]

Heh.  There was a sign at a fire station that said "Be careful walking and driving."

I thought, "I can't even imagine doing both at the same time.  That must take talent."

[kalvado]

Let's also not forget the issue of distracted walking.  It's way too easy to have one's head in a phone instead of noticing the signals and the traffic (of all kinds) around.

Yep, and using navigation software in unfamiliar location can make a difference between paying attention to driving and rubber-necking for street blades..
But, as long as we're on a subject, flagship accident of distracted driving saga is a perfect example of how much good some simple inspections - like enforcing breaks being checked - can do.

[jeffandnicole]

I hear a lot of stories that engineering measures reducing accidents elsewhere - noticeably, grade separated crosswalks - are no-go in US. Well, price is there to pay...

Las Vegas has invested significantly in overhead walkways at intersections.  But you need to see the significant infrastructure they put in at every intersection not only to get people across the streets, but to prevent people from crossing the street at ground level.  And I think a lot of the walkways have been paid for by the casinos, not by public funds.

So, it's the best solution, but a very expensive solution.  And in older cities where there's little sidewalk room to begin with, there's no room to build the infrastructure for an overhead walkway anyway unless you incorporate it thru existing buildings, which isn't going to happen often either.

[kalvado]

I hear a lot of stories that engineering measures reducing accidents elsewhere - noticeably, grade separated crosswalks - are no-go in US. Well, price is there to pay...

Las Vegas has invested significantly in overhead walkways at intersections.  But you need to see the significant infrastructure they put in at every intersection not only to get people across the streets, but to prevent people from crossing the street at ground level.  And I think a lot of the walkways have been paid for by the casinos, not by public funds.

So, it's the best solution, but a very expensive solution.  And in older cities where there's little sidewalk room to begin with, there's no room to build the infrastructure for an overhead walkway anyway unless you incorporate it thru existing buildings, which isn't going to happen often either.

For every intersection - that is too expensive, no question about that.
However there are hot spots, where accident do occur. For example: we have a crossing of a busy (40k traffic) street near the mall, and same spot works as a bus connection point. Overall a quite hot location. situation escalated as far as building a fence on median to confine pedestrians to a marked crosswalk, and police doing a "ticket a jaywalker" event. it begs for grade separation.
I can think of 2 or 3 similar locations in the area, and that shouldn't be  overly expensive...

[adventurernumber1]

This definitely comes as sad news to me. It is alarming that it is somewhat of an actual trend/pattern (for there to be three consecutive years of an increase in traffic deaths in Washington D.C.), and that it was not just one isolated year that was like this. This news actually reminds me of the fact that life expectancy in the United States has been on a slight decline for the second or third year in a row (especially because of the current opiate overdoses death epidemic, I had read), if I recall correctly. Unfortunately, of course, it just isn't that simple to fix overnight - it will probably take decades before we see significant progress in the decline of the massive traffic death epidemic that unfortunately exists, but we've got to start working toward it right now - and it is definitely good that some people in charge have the mindset of aiming toward "zero fatalities," which ties into a very good quote I actually saw for the first time earlier today (though it was completely unrelated to this), which said something along the lines of "Perfection is impossible, but if we aim for perfection, we might catch excellence."

[sparker]

I hear a lot of stories that engineering measures reducing accidents elsewhere - noticeably, grade separated crosswalks - are no-go in US. Well, price is there to pay...

Las Vegas has invested significantly in overhead walkways at intersections.  But you need to see the significant infrastructure they put in at every intersection not only to get people across the streets, but to prevent people from crossing the street at ground level.  And I think a lot of the walkways have been paid for by the casinos, not by public funds.

So, it's the best solution, but a very expensive solution.  And in older cities where there's little sidewalk room to begin with, there's no room to build the infrastructure for an overhead walkway anyway unless you incorporate it thru existing buildings, which isn't going to happen often either.

For every intersection - that is too expensive, no question about that.
However there are hot spots, where accident do occur. For example: we have a crossing of a busy (40k traffic) street near the mall, and same spot works as a bus connection point. Overall a quite hot location. situation escalated as far as building a fence on median to confine pedestrians to a marked crosswalk, and police doing a "ticket a jaywalker" event. it begs for grade separation.
I can think of 2 or 3 similar locations in the area, and that shouldn't be  overly expensive...

A number of California cities, with L.A. being the most prolific in this regard, had pedestrian tunnels under major streets in the downtown or other commercial districts.  Unfortunately, most of these, built in the late '40's through the early '60's, were deployed on the cheap -- hardly wide enough for two people to pass each other, poorly lit, with no line-of-sight from the entrances, which relegated them to the role of "mugging/assault central" or linear restrooms.  Eventually most of them were closed off or even filled in.  But the concept wasn't at fault; simply the execution.  While it would probably be difficult to retrofit safe and roomy undercrossings in dense areas, if included in neighborhood renovation plans (hopefully not full-on gentrification!) or newer developments along major arteries the concept may still be valid.

[Brian556]

The primary cause of traffic accidents is stupidity. Stop issuing drivers licenses to stupid people, and the problem would mostly go away

[Duke87]

Yeah, I don't know how they can think they can stop all fatals

This is one of those "aim for the stars so when you fail you'll fall in the clouds" things. No one is claiming zero fatalities is achievable, merely that it is a theoretical ideal we want to get as close to as possible.

And in many municipalities, Vision Zero has been hijacked by anti-highway and anti-auto ideology, which not doing anyone any good.

Indeed, which in some ways ends up being counterproductive towards the stated goal.  For example, grade separations are a great way of preventing crashes. If cities want to increase safety they should be building more of them, but the trend is instead towards removing them.

As with so many things, the fact that the effort is run by politicians rather than by people who actually know what they're doing renders it impotent.

[kalvado]

The primary cause of traffic accidents is stupidity. Stop issuing drivers licenses to stupid people, and the problem would mostly go away

The best answer I can give is this: lead by example and surrender your license today!

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah, I don't know how they can think they can stop all fatals

This is one of those "aim for the stars so when you fail you'll fall in the clouds" things. No one is claiming zero fatalities is achievable, merely that it is a theoretical ideal we want to get as close to as possible.

I dunno about that.  In the link CP provided at the top of this thread, it was mentioned twice in the first 7 paragraphs by two different DC officials about not a simple reduction or a large deduction, but actually getting to 0 fatalities.

[tradephoric]

The mayor of DC wants to eliminate transportation fatalities in the district by 2024.  In the first year of the Vision Zero initiative, traffic fatalities went up from 26 in 2015 to 28 in 2016.  Injuries increased from 12,122 to 12,430.  The silver lining is there was a 40% reduction in pedestrian fatalities.  Here's the first year progress report:

https://www.scribd.com/document/343681997/Final-2016-Progress-Report-V3#from_embed

[texaskdog]

Let's also not forget the issue of distracted walking.  It's way too easy to have one's head in a phone instead of noticing the signals and the traffic (of all kinds) around.

so tired of people just crossing roads wherever they want and not even looking up.

[kalvado]

Let's also not forget the issue of distracted walking.  It's way too easy to have one's head in a phone instead of noticing the signals and the traffic (of all kinds) around.

so tired of people just crossing roads wherever they want and not even looking up.

An even more interesting aspect is the number of intoxicated pedestrians getting killed. 1/3 of all drinking age pedestrians deaths, 1/4 of 16-20 age bin.
Looks like another low hanging fruit, I would say...

[SP Cook]

Up to 30 from 28 is not "soaring".  It is a normal variance from sample to sample. 

This is, like all traffic enforcement, about $$$$$$$$$.  First, of course, DC might want to concentrate on the 116 people who were MURDERED, the 296 people who were raped, the 1858 people who were assaulted with deadly weapons, and the 28743 people who were stolen from.  Once they lick that, maybe they can move on to traffic.  Start by ripping the radar gun out of every police car and destroying every red light camera, and then reform traffic laws based on SCIENCE with no regard for revenue, and then enforce them EQUALLY among all groups.

[Super Mateo]

The primary cause of traffic accidents is stupidity. Stop issuing drivers licenses to stupid people, and the problem would mostly go away

That's true, but a lot of people do well on a driving test, then start driving like fools the moment they get their license.  People should also get the license taken away permanently if they're caught talking on a phone or texting while driving.

This is, like all traffic enforcement, about $$$$$$$$$.

Which is why the "enforcement" never actually solves anything.  It almost always focuses on speed, which has little effect on the collision rate and is only a factor in extreme cases.  The numbers on the sign are usually arbitrary, which leads to them getting ignored, which in turn means money.  It's not a "problem" they want to fix; it's a money making gambit that's completely unfair to the driving public.  Once they stop their focus on speed (never going to happen), they can finally address the real issues to decrease deaths.  It will never hit zero, but they can come a lot closer.

Let's also not forget the issue of distracted walking.  It's way too easy to have one's head in a phone instead of noticing the signals and the traffic (of all kinds) around.

so tired of people just crossing roads wherever they want and not even looking up.

It's the opposite problem around here.  Pedestrians in a crosswalk have the right of way and drivers do not seem to understand that.  That said, both drivers and pedestrians in parking lots do whatever they want, and I'm surprised there haven't been more issues.

[jeffandnicole]

It's the opposite problem around here.  Pedestrians in a crosswalk have the right of way *

* They have the right of way when the light is in their favor.  If they step into a crosswalk against a red light or a red 'Don't Walk' symbol, the ped don't have the right of way.  Also, they are supposed to make sure that it's safe to cross.  If they step into the crosswalk with a car 3 feet away, they technically don't have the right of way because it would be impossible for the car to properly see them and stop.

[SP Cook]

Which is why the "enforcement" never actually solves anything.  It almost always focuses on speed, which has little effect on the collision rate and is only a factor in extreme cases.  The numbers on the sign are usually arbitrary, which leads to them getting ignored, which in turn means money.  It's not a "problem" they want to fix; it's a money making gambit that's completely unfair to the driving public.  Once they stop their focus on speed (never going to happen), they can finally address the real issues to decrease deaths.  It will never hit zero, but they can come a lot closer.

Exactly.  Any time a politician (and high ranking police are certainly politicians) spews fourth about "good community relations" and/or "traffic safety", they are lying.  If you want good relations with the community, especially visible minorities and young people (who are vastly more likely to be the victim of the corrupt system), dissolve the traffic division and understand that speed enforcement is corrupt, corrupts the police, and, by treating honest adult people like children (or worse) destroys any hope of being respected.  Because respect must be earned, and ending traffic enforcement is step one down that path.  And if you want traffic safety, things that CAUSE accidents, like red light camaras, must end.

But it not about safety, nor respect.  It is about $$$$$$$$$.

[PHLBOS]

The mayor of DC wants to eliminate transportation fatalities in the district by 2024.  In the first year of the Vision Zero initiative, traffic fatalities went up from 26 in 2015 to 28 in 2016.  Injuries increased from 12,122 to 12,430.  The silver lining is there was a 40% reduction in pedestrian fatalities.  Here's the first year progress report:

https://www.scribd.com/document/343681997/Final-2016-Progress-Report-V3#from_embed

Similarly in Philadelphia, Mayor Kenney signed an executive order committing the city to eliminate all roadway deaths by 2030.

There's actually a Vision Zero conference taking place tomorrow.
2018 Vision Zero for Philadelphia