Comment by walterbell | Hacker News Reader

Comment by walterbell | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

https://www.enotrans.org/article/bipartisan-infrastructure-b...

> Sub-state municipal governments, MPOs, and tribes will be able to apply for grants to develop Vision Zero plans ... At least 40 percent.. $400 million of the up-front $1 billion.. would have to go for the planning grants to develop Vision Zero plans.

https://visionzeronetwork.org/where-to-start/

> First implemented in Sweden in the 1990s, Vision Zero has proved successful across Europe — and now it’s gaining momentum in major American cities ... Vision Zero focuses on preventing traffic fatalities and serious injuries. This starts with understanding what and where the most problems are, then prioritizing resources to make systemic improvements. Data should be analyzed over at least five years to identify locations and types of serious crashes and to identify patterns. It is important to supplement police crash records, which can omit important information, with public health and equity data for a fuller picture.

https://visionzeronetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Wha...

> Speeding kills more than 10,000 people each year in the U.S. – on par with drunk driving – yet, the act of speeding does not carry the same social consequences as drunk driving. Vision Zero calls on communities to prioritize safe speeds through safe street design, automated speed enforcement (or safety cameras), and setting safe speed limits.

"Speeding kills more than 10,000 people each year in the U.S."

That's a little misleading. Excessive speed is a factor in about 30% of US traffic fatalities. That can have an overlap with other factors, like DUI, inattentive driving, or failure to yield. Speed itself is not the issue, as we see with lower fatality per mile on the autobahn, including areas without limits or with high limits. Speed mixed with bad decisions are the real problem. Driver education, testing, and consistent enforcement are really where the safety gains are.

There are issues other than just speed, but it's not a matter of bad decisions, unless you mean bad planning decisions. The autobahn is a great example: it might be really fast, but how many pedestrians ever have to cross it? How many entrances and exists are you finding per mile? The autobahn is pretty safe, so the speeds can be high. In a similar fashion, pedestrian deaths are rare in US highways, because it's unlikely you are going to find a pedestrian in the highway.

But compare this to, say, any of the deadliest roads in the US. They all have a pedestrian use case: People need to cross them. And yet, their lanes are as wide as highway lanes, are often at least 4, if not 8 lanes across, and so straight that, once you take away pedestrians and traffic, the design feels like an autobahn. They are often rated as 40mph streets, where people might do 50 or 60. A street like that will kill people if they try to cross, as many forms of failure lead to a 4000 pound vehicle going fast colliding the pedestrian, and that's often fatal. If there is a real pedestrian use case for the street, either the pedestrians need an easy way to just never step on the asphalt, or affordances that lower the risk need to be added in.

Again, basically every lethal mile of road in America has the same design characteristics and use cases, which aren't shared by safer roads. So it's not that no road can let you do 60mph: It's that too many American roads let you do at least 40, while pedestrians have to cross them. You might as well say that deaths in a very narrow bridge with spikes at the bottom is a matter of lack of education in funambulism.

"The autobahn is a great example: it might be really fast, but how many pedestrians ever have to cross it? How many entrances and exists are you finding per mile?"

Even compared to US interstates, which have similar attributes, the fatality rate is lower.

"But compare this to, say, any of the deadliest roads in the US."

I haven't seen any with more than 4 lanes to cross. Even those have extensive traffic and pedestrian control signals. Do you have some examples?

"It's that too many American roads let you do at least 40"

I've crossed a few with similar speeds. I never felt unsafe though through the use of common sense and traffic/pedestrian controls. It seemed the safety was adequately designed. I'd like to see more info on the actual factors involved in pedestrian deaths. The one with the most attention seems to be alcoho, at about 50% prevalence.

"Excessive speed" in the statistics is purely based on posted speed limit. The way posted speed limits are set in the US is not based on safety.

"The way posted speed limits are set in the US is not based on safety."

That's an opinion. Any source to back that up? The limits are set based on safety and flow considerations, with safety taking precedent.

""Excessive speed" in the statistics is purely based on posted speed limit."

Not true. This can include going too fast for conditions, such as in snow. Or exceeding the recommended speed for a turn, even if you're going the posted speed limit.

Your interpretations seem very biased so far. I'd love to see your data/facts and not just opinion.

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) recommends a speed study, setting the posted speed limit to the nearest 5 mph mark of the 85th percentile of observed speed. Safety is not the primary design consideration when it comes to roads in the US.

This is a half truth. It's one of many factors taken into consideration to set a safe speed limit.

Speeds of motorists in normal conditions

Traffic volume

Roadway type (e.g., interstate, freeway, city street)

Roadway features (e.g., curves, hills, number of lanes)

Roadway setting (e.g., urban, rural, residential, woodland, farmland)

Number and spacing of driveways or intersections

Sight distances

Presence of on-street parking

Pedestrian or bicyclist activity

Crash history

Pavement condition

> The way posted speed limits are set in the US is not based on safety.

You need to advocate for street redesign, then.

In California, most speed limits have a relation to the median speed that drivers drive on the roadway. If you want them to drive slower, you need to design the roads so that they drive slower.

Unfortunately, you will be fighting the local residents who don't want to spend extra time on every task because their local roads are so slow.

In my state, I've seen multiple roads reduce speeds. It's not solely based on median speed (per federal guidelines). The speed limits are based on multiple factors that can reduce the speed below the current median, such as on street parking and terrain. I would be very surprised if CA didn't account for other factors like these.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com