4 ms·

Today over 7000 pedestrians are killed in the U.S. every year, and the number is going up, not down. Today cars are heavier, faster, and more deadly to pedestr

Today over 7000 pedestrians are killed in the U.S. every year, and the number is going up, not down. Today cars are heavier, faster, and more deadly to pedestrians than ever before. Today isn’t a good time to be a pedestrian in the U.S.

wilg 3y ago
Most interestingly, the number of pedestrian deaths has only been going up very recently, since 2010. Before that it was decreasing. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedestrians https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes...
- db48x 3y ago
  Plus, pedestrian deaths are most likely at night, presumably due to the decreased visibility. The statistics also show the lowest death rate amongst children, and the highest amongst the elderly (with middle–aged adults barely overtaking the elderly in this race in the last couple of years). School children thus seem to be the least at risk, though I don’t know why; it could be because they no longer walk to and from school, or it could be because they are more likely to survive an accident than the elderly are, but neither of those explain the much larger drop in deaths amongst the elderly pedestrians. And of course national averages tell us nothing about the specific location in question. Still, I agree that the pedestrian accident rate really ought to be lower. A lot lower! I also think that the pedestrian accident rate is just not high enough to declare that areas like this are unsafe to walk in. Especially with a dedicated pedestrian bridge that allows people to avoid the car traffic at the busy service interchanges to the east and west. No, when people talk about the “walkability” of an area, they are almost always talking about the sheer density of businesses in the area not about safety. How they can walk to the grocery store, and their dentist, and their favorite bar, and also three different art galleries. How everything they need is never more than a 15–minute walk away. How each parking lot represents a wasted opportunity, because there are no services there, and nobody lives there either. But when this bridge was built they clearly were willing to walk further to access vital services like the school, past any number of parking lots. People are just a lot pickier today than they were in the past.
  - avianlyric 3y ago
    > No, when people talk about the “walkability” of an area, they are almost always talking about the sheer density of businesses in the area not about safety. How they can walk to the grocery store, and their dentist, and their favorite bar, and also three different art galleries. How everything they need is never more than a 15–minute walk away. How each parking lot represents a wasted opportunity, because there are no services there, and nobody lives there either. I guess I’m confused why people wouldn’t want this. Walking through empty car parks is unpleasant, and discouraging people from doing it, and it’s obviously not benefiting drivers either. I’m lucky enough to live in place where I can walk to shops, parks, cafes, transport etc etc within 15-20mins, and do so under cover of trees, surrounded by green, and without crossing roads due to well designed pedestrian facilities. This is all in a medium built area, and leads to wonderful quality of life. Why wouldn’t people want to live like this? Visiting the U.S. I’m honestly bamboozled that people seem to want live surrounded by car parks, having to drive from place to place, because walking is almost impossible. Not just due to car parks, but also because the boundaries between car parks and businesses seemed to be designed to prevent foot traffic. The U.S. strange belief that good walkability is something that can’t happen in the U.S. for reasons, is right up there with the U.S. belief that effective gun control can’t be implemented in U.S. for reasons, or trains and public transport can’t be implemented in the U.S. for reasons either. All off strikes me as weird given how much evidence that these thing can work in a country like the U.S., with plenty of that evidence existing in the U.S. own past! There’s an old quote attributed to Churchill that I think summarises my views very succinctly “You can depend upon the Americans to do the right thing. But only after they have exhausted every other possibility.”. I look forward to the day the U.S. has exhausted every other possibility, no doubt they’ll learn plenty of valuable lessons for everyone else along the way.
    - wilg 3y ago
      Nobody in this thread is disagreeing with you, and in fact, a vast majority of Americans do want walkable cities according to this survey I just googled: https://www.nar.realtor/newsroom/new-nar-survey-finds-americans-prefer-walkable-communities https://www.nar.realtor/newsroom/new-nar-survey-finds-americ... GP is just pointing out its interesting our tolerance for long walks seems to have decreased, which is not a commonly discussed factor. Also that pedestrian safety is not necessarily why people do not want to walk. (I agree with this, I don't think average people think about it at all. Though I do think they think about it for bikes.) Perhaps lowering costs of car transport or increased comfort or something like that contributed.

wilg 3y ago

Most interestingly, the number of pedestrian deaths has only been going up very recently, since 2010. Before that it was decreasing. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedestrians https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/pedes...

db48x 3y ago
Plus, pedestrian deaths are most likely at night, presumably due to the decreased visibility. The statistics also show the lowest death rate amongst children, and the highest amongst the elderly (with middle–aged adults barely overtaking the elderly in this race in the last couple of years). School children thus seem to be the least at risk, though I don’t know why; it could be because they no longer walk to and from school, or it could be because they are more likely to survive an accident than the elderly are, but neither of those explain the much larger drop in deaths amongst the elderly pedestrians. And of course national averages tell us nothing about the specific location in question. Still, I agree that the pedestrian accident rate really ought to be lower. A lot lower! I also think that the pedestrian accident rate is just not high enough to declare that areas like this are unsafe to walk in. Especially with a dedicated pedestrian bridge that allows people to avoid the car traffic at the busy service interchanges to the east and west. No, when people talk about the “walkability” of an area, they are almost always talking about the sheer density of businesses in the area not about safety. How they can walk to the grocery store, and their dentist, and their favorite bar, and also three different art galleries. How everything they need is never more than a 15–minute walk away. How each parking lot represents a wasted opportunity, because there are no services there, and nobody lives there either. But when this bridge was built they clearly were willing to walk further to access vital services like the school, past any number of parking lots. People are just a lot pickier today than they were in the past.
- avianlyric 3y ago
  > No, when people talk about the “walkability” of an area, they are almost always talking about the sheer density of businesses in the area not about safety. How they can walk to the grocery store, and their dentist, and their favorite bar, and also three different art galleries. How everything they need is never more than a 15–minute walk away. How each parking lot represents a wasted opportunity, because there are no services there, and nobody lives there either. I guess I’m confused why people wouldn’t want this. Walking through empty car parks is unpleasant, and discouraging people from doing it, and it’s obviously not benefiting drivers either. I’m lucky enough to live in place where I can walk to shops, parks, cafes, transport etc etc within 15-20mins, and do so under cover of trees, surrounded by green, and without crossing roads due to well designed pedestrian facilities. This is all in a medium built area, and leads to wonderful quality of life. Why wouldn’t people want to live like this? Visiting the U.S. I’m honestly bamboozled that people seem to want live surrounded by car parks, having to drive from place to place, because walking is almost impossible. Not just due to car parks, but also because the boundaries between car parks and businesses seemed to be designed to prevent foot traffic. The U.S. strange belief that good walkability is something that can’t happen in the U.S. for reasons, is right up there with the U.S. belief that effective gun control can’t be implemented in U.S. for reasons, or trains and public transport can’t be implemented in the U.S. for reasons either. All off strikes me as weird given how much evidence that these thing can work in a country like the U.S., with plenty of that evidence existing in the U.S. own past! There’s an old quote attributed to Churchill that I think summarises my views very succinctly “You can depend upon the Americans to do the right thing. But only after they have exhausted every other possibility.”. I look forward to the day the U.S. has exhausted every other possibility, no doubt they’ll learn plenty of valuable lessons for everyone else along the way.
  - wilg 3y ago
    Nobody in this thread is disagreeing with you, and in fact, a vast majority of Americans do want walkable cities according to this survey I just googled: https://www.nar.realtor/newsroom/new-nar-survey-finds-americans-prefer-walkable-communities https://www.nar.realtor/newsroom/new-nar-survey-finds-americ... GP is just pointing out its interesting our tolerance for long walks seems to have decreased, which is not a commonly discussed factor. Also that pedestrian safety is not necessarily why people do not want to walk. (I agree with this, I don't think average people think about it at all. Though I do think they think about it for bikes.) Perhaps lowering costs of car transport or increased comfort or something like that contributed.