SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the what-about-the-road-less-traveled? dept.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
We all became familiar with the idea of "bending a curve" thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic. Now it seems another US curve needs bending: that of US traffic fatalities, which have been up strongly and abnormally over the last couple of years. The low-hanging fruit when it comes to changing that might not be in the car as much as around it.
[...] Thanks in large part to in-car safety tech like airbags, antilock brakes, stability control and, more recently, automatic emergency braking, US traffic fatalities have generally been on a long decline since 1970. The 52,000 such deaths recorded 52 years ago shrank to 36,000 in 2019 even as the US population and vehicle miles driven both increased dramatically. But 2020 and 2021 saw the biggest spike in over 50 years to a total of almost 43,000 per year, turning the roadway fatality clock back to 2002. In short, something's not working as well as it did.
"We need regulations related to vehicle design and street design," says Yonah Freemark, senior research associate at the Urban Institute, a nonprofit think tank focused on urban mobility and equity. "Those two play a really important role in how likely people are to get killed in streets, especially pedestrians (and cyclists) that are struck by cars."
Speed cameras are common in several countries outside the US, often using technology that calculates average speed of a given vehicle based on the time stamps when it passes two or more places on the roadway.
In-vehicle safety technologies that protect occupants have only become more prevalent over the last couple of years, so Freemark looks at pedestrian and cyclist fatalities in collisions with cars as the next key area for improvement. Three-quarters of US auto buyers select a light truck that is typically heavier and larger than the sedan or coupe they may have chosen as their previous purchase, a formula for a more brutal impact with someone outside of the vehicle. In the future, many more electric cars will be sold and their well-known weight problem could exacerbate the seriousness of collisions.
[...] That difference plays out when you compare roadway fatality stats outside the US. "Over the last 20 years or so we've seen quite a divergence between other developed countries, like France," Freemark said of a comparison he's focused on. He noted other countries' taxation schemes that disincentivize the purchase of large, heavy vehicles as well as automatic speeding cameras and the presence of far more traffic circles that still befuddle most US drivers.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tbuskey on Monday July 25 2022, @05:40PM (10 children)
Streets are for people with some access for cars/trucks. For neighborhoods, shopping, with walking and biking Cars & delivery trucks can go down at a slower speed. Lots of driveways, alleyways and cross traffic. Signs are for people. People don't use cars once they get to these areas. Idealy, they live & park there. Or take a bus, train, subway, bike to get to the area from where they park the car a short distance away or leave the car at home. sidewalks and buildings are close to the pavement. There is only a lane for 1 car in either direction or just 1 way.
Roads are for cars at high speeds. No pedestrians, no bicycles On & off ramps. No lights, stop signs, cross traffic. Signs are for cars at high speeds. If cars go off the road, there clear spaces where they shouldn't be able to hit bikes, pedestians, buildings. Lane directions are separated & have room to pass. Some of these roads can be dangerous for motorcycles.
Stroads have high speeds w/ lots of driveways, parking lot entrance, exits, lights, cross traffic. These are basically roads with all the cross traffic added in. They are designed for cars. If there are considerations for people, they throw in sidewalks & crosswalks. To deal w/ cross traffic, there are lights to stop traffic if they want to make an intersection/exit/entrance safer. Things are spread out too far for buses, subways and trains to be cost effective.
It's often difficult to go from one store parking lot to the next store unless you have a car. There might be a road connecting the lots or you might have to exit the lot & enter the next one. There is probably no sidewalk between lots. And who would want to walk or bicycle here? It's really easy to get hit
As an argument to the "but big shopping areas need big lots".
A mall has a parking lot for the cars, then a street between all the stores w/ no cars. There is road on the outside & around back for trucks to deliver to stores.
Amusement parks will have transport available from the lots to the park and may have transport within the park available.
Of course one-size doesn't fit everything. Eventually, the 5-10 miles stroads connecting to large stores with parking lots will need more expensive traffic lights to safely allow entering/exiting traffic. This will make the traffic wait a long time to get through.
There are towns and housing developments being built with roads on the outside and streets on the inside. You can park all the cars outside, all streets inside are pedestrian only or streets are short, narrow & slow to the store lots and apartments within. Someone living there has a short walk to groceries, restaurants and other things.
We need to design things for people 1st and add cars afterwards.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ElizabethGreene on Monday July 25 2022, @07:52PM (9 children)
When I build software, I write it to match how people actually use it and not how I want them to use it. I love walkable design, but does it make sense for it to be the first design principle when the portion of people with/using vehicles approaches unity?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by tekk on Monday July 25 2022, @08:40PM (7 children)
Yes, because cars are dangerous, inefficient, costly, and unsustainable in as many ways as you can think of. The only reason cars approach unity in the US is that almost all of the US for the last 80 years has been intentionally designed to make your life as miserable as possible if you don't have a car.
(Score: 3, Touché) by khallow on Monday July 25 2022, @09:36PM (6 children)
Timely point to point travel with a continental range with the capability to carry several hundred pounds of cargo. Cars are inefficient, until you realize that the alternatives are routinely worse for typical car scenarios.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26 2022, @02:01AM (5 children)
If I'm going down to the shop for a pint of milk and a loaf of bread, it's pretty fucking inefficient to use a continental range transport with a carrying capacity approaching a ton.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 26 2022, @01:20PM (4 children)
"IF". Last time I used a car, I drove 80 miles, did some shopping including filling up a large cooler I had brought along, and a hair cut. All in five hours. It keeps getting missed here that a lot of people in the US use cars in situations that other transportation from bikes to buses just don't make sense.
(Score: 2) by tekk on Tuesday July 26 2022, @02:04PM (3 children)
How often do you do that, though? There are situations where renting a car or truck can make sense, it just isn't an every day (or even necessarily every month.)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 26 2022, @06:00PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26 2022, @06:08PM (1 child)
> renting a car or truck can make sense
Logic fail!!!
If he's 80 miles from civilization (defined as stores and at least one barber shop--in this case), there is a snowball's chance in hell that there is a car rental agency any where near his starting point.
He needs his own car, a neighbor to car pool with, or possibly a taxi/uber (at high cost, if they exist out there). Or two days in his schedule to bicycle (if he's very fit).
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday July 27 2022, @01:15AM
I'd totally do that, if I could spare time from my busy bear wrestling schedule.
(Score: 1) by tbuskey on Monday July 25 2022, @10:34PM
Just because most people have X and use X all the time doesn't mean X is the only way to meet their needs.
Not too long ago all cell phones had a physical keyboard and all people could do is talk on them.
Then texting came about and there was an LCD you could read messages so they made an alphabetical keyboard.
Then blackberry expanded the LCD and you could do email on it.
How many phones have real keyboards now?