More MOCO Upzoning - Starting in Silver Spring

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

You can't fix stupid, but you can engineer systems so that stupid doesn't kill. We do it all the time for cars and drivers.

The number of people who die on the streets here is small and it is basically the same every single year. The year to year variations are not statistically significant which suggests that all the efforts made to reengineer roads doesnt make any difference whatsoever.

36,500 people killed, 4.5 million injured, 23 million vehicles damaged, $340 billion in costs, across the US, in 2019. That's not a small problem.

As for "all the efforts made to reengineer roads," let's take Georgia Avenue. What has been done on Georgia Avenue to reengineer the road according to Vision Zero?

Is this a serious question? Many stretches of GA Ave have had speed limits lowered TWICE in the past few years, in addition to having speed cameras and red light cameras installed. For example, between Spring & 16th, it used to be 40, then 35, and now 30, plus there are multiple speed cameras in each direction, plus a red light camera at Seminary. Very similar between Forest Glen Rd and Veirs Mill, and again on the stretch of GA Ave in Aspen Hill.

There is also street parking allowed in some places (e.g., near the Safeway in Wheaton) where previously street parking was not allowed.

If you don't think traffic goes much, much slower as a result of all of these changes, you're being disingenuous or you didn't travel on GA Ave until recently so you can't compare to how it used to be.

The question was about re-engineering. Speed limits, speed cameras, and red lights are not re-engineering, they're enforcement. Now if you want to argue that average driving speeds are slower on Georgia Avenue because of enforcement, I won't disagree - although there's obviously still a big problem with speeding, and even street racing. If you want to argue that drivers should be allowed to drive 40 mph through a densely-populated area, I will disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The other whole thing about Vision Zero is that it's complete bullshit. It doesnt work. Traffic calming is a myth. If you try to slow down someone in one area, they will just avoid that area or go a lot faster elsewhere because they now know no one is looking.

I see this in my own life. If there's a bunch of speed bumps on the road, I'm more likely to roll through a stop sign to make up the difference in time. It would be better if I completely stopped at the stop sign instead of temporarily going slowly in the middle of the street.

You're not going to retrain people to think that their normal 15 minute drive should now take 25 minutes. They will think it should be 15 minutes no matter what obstacles you throw up.

It actually does work, no matter how many personal anecdotes you might relate.

What’s going to happen is this will force more Beltway traffic or back road /neighorhood routes . Getting to Wheaton Mall from Blair shouldn’t take 30 minutes.

That's 3.5 miles. It takes about 11 minutes to go 3.5 miles at 20 mph. It sounds like you're not complaining about speed limits, you're complaining about other cars that are on the road when you're on the road. The University Boulevard corridor plan proposes to fix this by planning for good transportation alternatives, so people aren't forced to drive this short distance. For example, buses will run frequently in their own lanes, so they won't be stuck in car traffic. Also, it's easy to bike this distance in less than 30 minutes. Every driver who takes a bus or bikes instead of driving will represent one less car to get in your way when you're trying to drive.

But if you want to drive 40 mph down University Boulevard between the mall and Blair? Nope. University Boulevard is a road through a densely-populated area where lots of people are walking, riding the bus, biking, going to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The other whole thing about Vision Zero is that it's complete bullshit. It doesnt work. Traffic calming is a myth. If you try to slow down someone in one area, they will just avoid that area or go a lot faster elsewhere because they now know no one is looking.

I see this in my own life. If there's a bunch of speed bumps on the road, I'm more likely to roll through a stop sign to make up the difference in time. It would be better if I completely stopped at the stop sign instead of temporarily going slowly in the middle of the street.

You're not going to retrain people to think that their normal 15 minute drive should now take 25 minutes. They will think it should be 15 minutes no matter what obstacles you throw up.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

Out of the 30 remaining accidents, 23 were drivers and 7 passengers.

12 of the 30 were not wearing seatbelts.

“Complete Streets” will never get anyone to wear a seatbelt and if you don’t wear a seatbelt you are putting your life at risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The only way to eliminate deaths from people being stupid is if everyone stays home.

Stupid people being reckless are an eternal fact of human nature. Whatever you do, stupid people will inevitably defeat.

Education and enforcement are the only answer if are actually interested in savings lives and not pursuing an alternative agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. Something that happens to me, surprisingly frequently, is when a driver behind me gets impatient because I'm driving just below the speed limit, so they pass me at the first opportunity (often illegally), and then I end up right behind them at the red light. These speeding drivers are not getting anywhere any faster than I am.

So…what color is your Prius?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Something that happens to me, surprisingly frequently, is when a driver behind me gets impatient because I'm driving just below the speed limit, so they pass me at the first opportunity (often illegally), and then I end up right behind them at the red light. These speeding drivers are not getting anywhere any faster than I am.

So…what color is your Prius?

I have two cars, and neither one is a Prius. I don't know what point you're trying to make, anyway. That Prius drivers are more law-abiding? Or maybe non-Prius drivers are scofflaws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The only way to eliminate deaths from people being stupid is if everyone stays home.

Stupid people being reckless are an eternal fact of human nature. Whatever you do, stupid people will inevitably defeat.

Education and enforcement are the only answer if are actually interested in savings lives and not pursuing an alternative agenda.

I mean, you're just plain wrong on this one. The US is an extreme outlier among wealthy countries, including Canada, for traffic deaths. But you have a right to your objectively incorrect opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

Out of the 30 remaining accidents, 23 were drivers and 7 passengers.

12 of the 30 were not wearing seatbelts.

“Complete Streets” will never get anyone to wear a seatbelt and if you don’t wear a seatbelt you are putting your life at risk.

I'm old enough to remember when people were outraged by seatbelt laws, and when car manufacturers opposed a federal requirement for airbags. Now we have seatbelt laws and required airbags, and they both prevent deaths. I also remember when that guy in the Maryland legislature prevented ignition interlock laws for years, but now we have those too, and they also prevent deaths. There's also a new federal requirement for automated braking systems, and those will prevent deaths. Requirements for truck rear and side underride guards prevent deaths. Requirements for crumple zones prevent deaths. Guard rails prevent deaths. Rumble grooves on the sides of highways prevent deaths. So when you say that it's not possible to stop people from being killed when they make mistakes, you're just wrong. There are lots of things we do, which work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The other whole thing about Vision Zero is that it's complete bullshit. It doesnt work. Traffic calming is a myth. If you try to slow down someone in one area, they will just avoid that area or go a lot faster elsewhere because they now know no one is looking.

I see this in my own life. If there's a bunch of speed bumps on the road, I'm more likely to roll through a stop sign to make up the difference in time. It would be better if I completely stopped at the stop sign instead of temporarily going slowly in the middle of the street.

You're not going to retrain people to think that their normal 15 minute drive should now take 25 minutes. They will think it should be 15 minutes no matter what obstacles you throw up.

It actually does work, no matter how many personal anecdotes you might relate.

What’s going to happen is this will force more Beltway traffic or back road /neighorhood routes . Getting to Wheaton Mall from Blair shouldn’t take 30 minutes.

That's 3.5 miles. It takes about 11 minutes to go 3.5 miles at 20 mph. It sounds like you're not complaining about speed limits, you're complaining about other cars that are on the road when you're on the road. The University Boulevard corridor plan proposes to fix this by planning for good transportation alternatives, so people aren't forced to drive this short distance. For example, buses will run frequently in their own lanes, so they won't be stuck in car traffic. Also, it's easy to bike this distance in less than 30 minutes. Every driver who takes a bus or bikes instead of driving will represent one less car to get in your way when you're trying to drive.

But if you want to drive 40 mph down University Boulevard between the mall and Blair? Nope. University Boulevard is a road through a densely-populated area where lots of people are walking, riding the bus, biking, going to school.

Most people aren’t going to change their lifestyle catch the bus and bike if there’s free parking available. Comparing Moco to DC where free parking is limited isn’t fair. The bike lanes and increased transit buses will only cause more bottlenecks along with school buses, drivers, and pedestrians .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The other whole thing about Vision Zero is that it's complete bullshit. It doesnt work. Traffic calming is a myth. If you try to slow down someone in one area, they will just avoid that area or go a lot faster elsewhere because they now know no one is looking.

I see this in my own life. If there's a bunch of speed bumps on the road, I'm more likely to roll through a stop sign to make up the difference in time. It would be better if I completely stopped at the stop sign instead of temporarily going slowly in the middle of the street.

You're not going to retrain people to think that their normal 15 minute drive should now take 25 minutes. They will think it should be 15 minutes no matter what obstacles you throw up.

It actually does work, no matter how many personal anecdotes you might relate.

What’s going to happen is this will force more Beltway traffic or back road /neighorhood routes . Getting to Wheaton Mall from Blair shouldn’t take 30 minutes.

That's 3.5 miles. It takes about 11 minutes to go 3.5 miles at 20 mph. It sounds like you're not complaining about speed limits, you're complaining about other cars that are on the road when you're on the road. The University Boulevard corridor plan proposes to fix this by planning for good transportation alternatives, so people aren't forced to drive this short distance. For example, buses will run frequently in their own lanes, so they won't be stuck in car traffic. Also, it's easy to bike this distance in less than 30 minutes. Every driver who takes a bus or bikes instead of driving will represent one less car to get in your way when you're trying to drive.

But if you want to drive 40 mph down University Boulevard between the mall and Blair? Nope. University Boulevard is a road through a densely-populated area where lots of people are walking, riding the bus, biking, going to school.

Most people aren’t going to change their lifestyle catch the bus and bike if there’s free parking available. Comparing Moco to DC where free parking is limited isn’t fair. The bike lanes and increased transit buses will only cause more bottlenecks along with school buses, drivers, and pedestrians .

We're not talking about people changing their lifestyle. Do you consider driving everywhere for every trip to be your lifestyle? Here's what I do: when I'm going somewhere, I choose the transportation option that works for me. On some trips, at some times, driving works best for me. Other times, the bus or Metro work best. Other times, biking works best. Sometimes, walking works best! That's not my lifestyle, that's just me going places.

And with the University Boulevard corridor plan, the bus or biking or walking will work best for more people at more times. This is a good thing. Everyone will have more transportation choices, and you will have less car traffic to deal with.

[Anonymous]

What is going on with the housing inside the blue line is what u need to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The other whole thing about Vision Zero is that it's complete bullshit. It doesnt work. Traffic calming is a myth. If you try to slow down someone in one area, they will just avoid that area or go a lot faster elsewhere because they now know no one is looking.

I see this in my own life. If there's a bunch of speed bumps on the road, I'm more likely to roll through a stop sign to make up the difference in time. It would be better if I completely stopped at the stop sign instead of temporarily going slowly in the middle of the street.

You're not going to retrain people to think that their normal 15 minute drive should now take 25 minutes. They will think it should be 15 minutes no matter what obstacles you throw up.

It actually does work, no matter how many personal anecdotes you might relate.

What’s going to happen is this will force more Beltway traffic or back road /neighorhood routes . Getting to Wheaton Mall from Blair shouldn’t take 30 minutes.

That's 3.5 miles. It takes about 11 minutes to go 3.5 miles at 20 mph. It sounds like you're not complaining about speed limits, you're complaining about other cars that are on the road when you're on the road. The University Boulevard corridor plan proposes to fix this by planning for good transportation alternatives, so people aren't forced to drive this short distance. For example, buses will run frequently in their own lanes, so they won't be stuck in car traffic. Also, it's easy to bike this distance in less than 30 minutes. Every driver who takes a bus or bikes instead of driving will represent one less car to get in your way when you're trying to drive.

But if you want to drive 40 mph down University Boulevard between the mall and Blair? Nope. University Boulevard is a road through a densely-populated area where lots of people are walking, riding the bus, biking, going to school.

Most people aren’t going to change their lifestyle catch the bus and bike if there’s free parking available. Comparing Moco to DC where free parking is limited isn’t fair. The bike lanes and increased transit buses will only cause more bottlenecks along with school buses, drivers, and pedestrians .

We're not talking about people changing their lifestyle. Do you consider driving everywhere for every trip to be your lifestyle? Here's what I do: when I'm going somewhere, I choose the transportation option that works for me. On some trips, at some times, driving works best for me. Other times, the bus or Metro work best. Other times, biking works best. Sometimes, walking works best! That's not my lifestyle, that's just me going places.

And with the University Boulevard corridor plan, the bus or biking or walking will work best for more people at more times. This is a good thing. Everyone will have more transportation choices, and you will have less car traffic to deal with.

We've spent billions of dollars accommodating a tiny number of cyclists' lifestyle. They have no more need to ride a bike anywhere than I have a need to ride a horse to work. That they choose to wear their goofy little spandex outfits and their click clack shoes, like they're in the Tour de France, suggests that cyclists too think of it as a hobby. I don't have a special outfit for when I drive. I don't have a costume for riding the subway.

[Anonymous]

aaa

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The other whole thing about Vision Zero is that it's complete bullshit. It doesnt work. Traffic calming is a myth. If you try to slow down someone in one area, they will just avoid that area or go a lot faster elsewhere because they now know no one is looking.

I see this in my own life. If there's a bunch of speed bumps on the road, I'm more likely to roll through a stop sign to make up the difference in time. It would be better if I completely stopped at the stop sign instead of temporarily going slowly in the middle of the street.

You're not going to retrain people to think that their normal 15 minute drive should now take 25 minutes. They will think it should be 15 minutes no matter what obstacles you throw up.

It actually does work, no matter how many personal anecdotes you might relate.

What’s going to happen is this will force more Beltway traffic or back road /neighorhood routes . Getting to Wheaton Mall from Blair shouldn’t take 30 minutes.

That's 3.5 miles. It takes about 11 minutes to go 3.5 miles at 20 mph. It sounds like you're not complaining about speed limits, you're complaining about other cars that are on the road when you're on the road. The University Boulevard corridor plan proposes to fix this by planning for good transportation alternatives, so people aren't forced to drive this short distance. For example, buses will run frequently in their own lanes, so they won't be stuck in car traffic. Also, it's easy to bike this distance in less than 30 minutes. Every driver who takes a bus or bikes instead of driving will represent one less car to get in your way when you're trying to drive.

But if you want to drive 40 mph down University Boulevard between the mall and Blair? Nope. University Boulevard is a road through a densely-populated area where lots of people are walking, riding the bus, biking, going to school.

Most people aren’t going to change their lifestyle catch the bus and bike if there’s free parking available. Comparing Moco to DC where free parking is limited isn’t fair. The bike lanes and increased transit buses will only cause more bottlenecks along with school buses, drivers, and pedestrians .

We're not talking about people changing their lifestyle. Do you consider driving everywhere for every trip to be your lifestyle? Here's what I do: when I'm going somewhere, I choose the transportation option that works for me. On some trips, at some times, driving works best for me. Other times, the bus or Metro work best. Other times, biking works best. Sometimes, walking works best! That's not my lifestyle, that's just me going places.

And with the University Boulevard corridor plan, the bus or biking or walking will work best for more people at more times. This is a good thing. Everyone will have more transportation choices, and you will have less car traffic to deal with.

We've spent billions of dollars accommodating a tiny number of cyclists' lifestyle. They have no more need to ride a bike anywhere than I have a need to ride a horse to work. That they choose to wear their goofy little spandex outfits and their click clack shoes, like they're in the Tour de France, suggests that cyclists too think of it as a hobby. I don't have a special outfit for when I drive. I don't have a costume for riding the subway.

I understand that your hobby, possibly even your lifestyle, is hating online on a small group of people who bicycle for recreation, but that's not relevant to this thread. Go post on the Connecticut Avenue bike lanes thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they want to drop the missing middle rezoning proposal and just do this one maybe that is a reasonable compromise, but upzoning everything is a bad idea. Vision zero is idiotic and unrealistic though. The goal of reducing traffic fatalities attainable, but we need to balance operational concerns with safety improvements. The only way to achieve basically zero traffic deaths would be to reduce speed limit to 15 mph everywhere. Ridiculous policy goals like vision zero will harm society more than it helps.

How many deaths do you think it's worth for you to get somewhere 5 minutes faster in your car? How about 10 minutes faster in your car? Also, is it ok for people in your family to be killed or seriously injured in a car crash, or should car crash deaths and serious injuries be limited to people in other people's families?

This is a childish argument. Society needs to move and we try to keep people safe. To keep EVERYONE safe, we can't use cars and trucks... or bikes... or even horses. Society can't control people who cross the street wearing black at night. Society can't control everyone who drinks and drives. Society can't stop every idiot who speeds, etc. So, yes... in a society with many people and many making bad decisions, people are going to die in accidents.

Society can use street lighting. Society can use ignition interlocks. Society can use speed governors.

Umm… everything has a cost, including bad decisions. You are being ridiculous.

The issue here obviously isn't that Vision Zero is unattainable. It's that you're not interested in attaining it. You're fine with people being killed in car crashes. Well, everyone gets to have their own opinions, and that includes you.

Zero is obviously unattainable. But the more sophisticated question is what are the details on the 40 deaths, plus those prior years. You can't address a problem, assuming there is one, without more details here. If only a few happened at red lights, then red lights are not the issue.

That data is readily available, courtesy of the police. They say that in 2022, there were 35 traffic deaths in DC which is about the same it is every year. Despite the billions poured into bike stuff and the endless reengineering of roads, traffic deaths don't actually change very much each year, especially when you consider there's billions of trips taken each year.

Here's the causes in 2022:

12 deaths -- pedestrian error
9 deaths -- driver speeding
4 deaths -- driver drunk/stoned/impaired
4 deaths -- driver error
2 deaths -- bicycle error
2 deaths -- medical emergency
1 death -- scooter/atv/motorcycle error
1 death -- hit and run/unknown

Your idea here seems to be: people make mistakes, therefore we shouldn't do anything to reduce the number of car crashes that kill people.

No wonder you don't like Vision Zero, which is based on this idea: humans make mistakes, but those mistakes shouldn't come with the death penalty.

Almost half the deaths are the fault of pedestrians, cyclists and other nondrivers. Maybe start there.

It's also not a great idea to tell drunk and stoned drivers that there are free to do whatever they like (which is the message our reliance on traffic cameras sends to them). If you've ever known anyone with substance problems, they know exactly what they can get away with and they will not think twice about driving when they can barely stand up.

First of all, you're posting DC numbers, not Montgomery County numbers. Don't you have a thread about Connecticut Avenue bike lanes to post on?

Second of all, yes, starting there is the whole idea. Making sure that the streets are safe and convenient for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers to use, and also making sure that even if pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-drivers make a mistake, that mistake doesn't kill them. The great benefit of using this approach is that it actually makes streets safer for everybody, including drivers and passenger.

As a driver, I don't like the idea that it's ok for me to kill someone who was crossing when there was a don't walk sign, and most of my fellow human beings feel the same way.

Can you post the Montgomery County numbers?

Montgomery County has a whole Vision Zero website
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/visionzero/
where you can find the information you're looking for.

This has a link to the MD state Vision Zero Dashboard which provides the following data.

45 traffic deaths in 2023, of which 14 pedestrians and 1 bicyclist.

Out of those deaths, actions at time of death were:
- 4 In Roadway Improperly
- 3 Dart Dash
- 3 Unknown
- 2 Fail to Obey Signal
- 2 No Improper Actions
- 1 Other
- 1 Wrong Way Walking or Riding

So nearly all of the time the cause of pedestrian or cyclist death is their own reckless behavior.

So 30 people killed in motor vehicles. Two-thirds of the people killed in car crashes in Montgomery County in 2023 were in motor vehicles. Let's talk about them first.

Then let's talk about why you think it's ok to kill pedestrians and bicyclists who were "in roadway improperly" or failed to obey a signal or whatever. The appropriate punishment for failing to obey a signal is a traffic citation, not death by driver.

DP. Of course it’s not ok to kill someone on a road. But your comparison of an accidental death to a punishment is ridiculous. I know that calling every road fatality a murder is one of Vision Zero’s favorite tropes, but it makes you sound like you lack capacity for critical reasoning.

You're going to need to decide for yourself whether you think it was accidental (nobody's fault, just something that happens) or the fault of the pedestrians or bicyclists for being reckless.

Assuming that you are the person that provided the link, I love that you like
like to cite the data but not actually scrutinize it and then change your time to focus on emotion when the data reveals information that contradicts your premise.

13 of the 15 fatalities that occurred when it was dark and 12 were on state highways. What can we do as a society when people are out in the middle of the road or crossing against signals or darting into traffic in the dark on a state highway? Not only can you not fix stupid you cannot engineer away stupid either.

This is why Vision Zero is a joke, because is dispassionate view of the data looking at accident causes should result in a policy focused on pedestrian and cyclist education and even enforcement in order to save them from themselves.

+1. We're going to throw a ton of money at this Vision Zero initiative, and my guess is that traffic deaths actually won't decrease one bit.

Vision Zero is feasible in urban areas, it is not feasible in suburban or rural areas. You just have too many cars going too fast.

It’s not feasible in urban areas when people don’t follow the rules.

So the whole thing about Vision Zero is that it prevents deaths and serious injuries even when people don't follow the rules.

The only way to eliminate deaths from people being stupid is if everyone stays home.

Stupid people being reckless are an eternal fact of human nature. Whatever you do, stupid people will inevitably defeat.

Education and enforcement are the only answer if are actually interested in savings lives and not pursuing an alternative agenda.

I mean, you're just plain wrong on this one. The US is an extreme outlier among wealthy countries, including Canada, for traffic deaths. But you have a right to your objectively incorrect opinion.

The US also has significantly higher levels of gun violence, inequality and poorer quality of education than peer countries. We are a country that produces many stupid people that do stupid things.

Just look at the numbers. 12 people are dead because they’re too stupid not to run into the middle of a state highway at night. That stuff is just not happening in other rich countries at the same level. Engineering is not going to stop stupid people from doing stupid things.

Vision Zero is inherently naive and anti-science.