Traffic Violence. 3 stories.

Hello APCSC Friends~

Three recent tragic events inspire this newsletter today.

I’d truly prefer not to be writing about them.

Please share your thoughts after reading. At the start of the holiday season I know it’s a downer. but so important that we have these conversations.

First: Last week a child was struck and seriously injured by a driver in Asbury Park. I published the family’s GoFundMe on social media. They will need ongoing help, even though they only asked for funds to pay for a ramp for the child’s wheelchair.

The child who was struck by a driver after getting off his bus in Asbury Park.

A long Asbury Park Next Door thread ensued, in which people strayed way off the topic to mention annoyance of bicyclists riding on the sidewalk, revealing a total lack of understanding of the critical importance of improving infrastructure design so drivers cannot run into children as they get off the bus – the true dangers of drivers on our roads. And outrageously, one commenter stated, “Watch your kids.”, showing a stunning lack of empathy for the child with a broken pelvis, and his family with serious, ongoing financial needs.

Second: A tone deaf article in the NYTimes. The paper published an article on November 29th that’s unsurprisingly tone deaf citing an an incident of road rage in which a cycling advocate was killed. In twisted logic the writer blames the incident on The War On Cars. This (formerly) highly respected news outlet is not immune to the brainwashing of the auto industry, NYT editors are willfully ignorant, or else they just want to sell readership piling on with those who continue to bash bicycling advocacy in the US. Streetsblog called out the NYTimes in an article today.

The cyclist fatality in Paris was NOT caused by the “war on cars”.

It’s sadly unsurprising that American reporting would avoid applauding Paris Mayor Anne Hildago’s success in building more and more bicycling infrastructure, and vastly improving health and safety for everyone in the city.

Third: A bicyclist fatality in Long Branch. Can you spot what’s wrong, wrong, wrong with this reporting? Read the article in Patch.

Poor street lighting can be the cause of a fatal crash.

The “teen”driver is not held responsible because he “stayed at the scene”, and “it appears to be an accident”.

American crash reporting almost always absolves the driver unless they are intoxicated. The victim is often blamed for being on the road at all, or not wearing a helmet or bright clothing.

The driver should not always be blamed.

Journalists rarely mention the distractions of gigantic dashboard screens, the dangers of huge SUVs, the design of roads that allow, even seem to invite speeding, lack of adequate street lighting, or insufficient bicycling and walking infrastructure. All of which is truly to blame.

In the US drivers do terrible things because they can. Roads are dangerous by design, the industry is not regulated against selling excessively large vehicles, and the built environment prioritizes drivers above all other road users.

These, and almost all other CRASHES are preventable.

Airline crashes are treated as such – the plane is grounded, and every aspect of the crash is investigated to prevent it happening again. Not so with car crashes. 40,000 people are killed in traffic violence every year in the US.

Road violence is rarely an accident. It’s always a crash. #crashnotaccident

Our city leaders and traffic engineers ignore the needs of the large % of people in every community who do not or cannot drive, whether due to age, disability, or financial reasons.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Join the movement.

Email: apcompletestreets@gmail.com

Onward~

Polli Schildge

Editor APCSC

Postscript:

Without question every collision is a crash. Sadly some people still think crash and accident are interchangeable terms. The use of accident is no accident – the auto industry has made that term ubiquitous and it’s been adopted by police and journalists thereby taking the onus off drivers and systems that lead to crashes. Thankfully many police departments and journalists are switching to crash, but in some recent articles BOTH terms are used. It’s hard to break a habit…

Calling a crash an accident makes it seem pre-ordained or unavoidable.

Crashes take the lives of 40,000 people every year in the US and they’re treated like collateral damage because, oh well, we have to drive.

It’s criminal that traffic/road engineers and the auto industry have continued to fail people, to kill people – the vulnerable road users outside of cars, those within cars, and drivers themselves.

April 25, 2020April 26, 2020

Life Now And after Lockdown – A Call To Action

We shouldn’t look forward to “back to normal”

From The Editor

Polli Schildge April 26th, 2020

Most of the world was experiencing an environmental and human health crisis before the onslaught of the Corona Virus. Vehicles were spewing pollution, and we were experiencing a human health catastrophe in crash deaths. Air quality around the world has vastly improved with the reduction of driving, and the crash fatality rate has plummeted. (Unfortunately entitled drivers are currently speeding more.)

Taking glimpses of cities around the world: “The skies are clearing of pollution, wildlife is returning to newly clear waters”… But “how people react to the return of normalcy after the pandemic will help define the crises racking the environment… “A key question will be do we have a green recovery, do we seize the opportunity to create jobs in renewable energy and in making coastlines more resilient to climate change?”

We need to reduce the use of motorized vehicles, and reduce vehicle speeds to protect the environment and human life. Milan, Paris, Berlin, Brussels, and Oakland, CA are beginning now and planning for the future, creating networks of bike lanes, and widening sidewalks to enable more walking.

The plan in Milan, Italy , which will “boldly and beneficially re-imagine our lives, landscapes, and future on the other side is hailed as an “excellent example of #buildbackbetter and activists like Greta Thunberg called for “crafting similar schemes for other major cities like New York, London, and beyond.”

The World Resources Institute cites cities like Bogota, Mexico City, London, Chicago, and Philadelphia which are opening streets to people for walking and biking, and planning permanent infrastructure. “Today’s COVID-19 lockdowns could reveal solutions that have far-reaching benefits for cities long into the future, pointing the way to more resilient, accessible and safe urban transport. A city with more cycling is a city with healthier people, safer streets, cleaner air and better connectivity.”

Asbury Park’s Plan for Walking and Biking, outlines incremental development of a network of bike lanes and walking infrastructure. There are discussions about future re-allocation of road space to provide for walking and biking, and to reduce traffic and parking problems. We believe that this is the perfect time to launch some of these plans and ideas. People are walking and biking more than ever now, and we’re demonstrating the need for more space. As the weather warms there will be more walkers and people biking, and our sidewalks are too narrow, and our streets are too accommodating for cars and trucks. We can’t immediately build wider sidewalks, or instantaneously create bike infrastructure, but we can open streets to people, and reduce access to motor vehicles. Asbury Park can emulate other cities and countries where they have utilized tactical urbanism to quickly turn streets into places for people: New Zealand makes tactical urbanism a part of its national policy during the pandemic.

This is a call to action. When the pandemic is over, will streets be even more clogged with cars, risking the lives of people walking and on bikes? It doesn’t have to happen. We can start now to prioritize people, and not vehicles on our city streets. This article in The Atlantic sums it up. The Pandemic Shows What Cars Have Done to Cities.

New York City before the pandemic ERNST HAAS / GETTY

Let’s stay safe and healthy walking and riding bikes now, and let’s work to make streets safe for the most vulnerable users for after this terrible and challenging time has passed. We can learn from life during a pandemic, and work diligently to create a new normal.

December 18, 2018December 17, 2018

Who Owns The Streets?

Do you drive and feel like people who walk and ride bikes are taking over your city – and you’re losing your privilege? How do you feel about walking in your city? Are you riding a bike for recreation or daily for transportation? Maybe you drive a car when you need to, but also walk and ride a bike whenever you can? Let’s take a look at it…

The Pedestrian Strikes Back

Officials in several countries are getting the message: Cities are about people, not cars. Read about it:

By Richard Conniff Contributing Opinion Writer Dec. 15, 2018

In many of the major cities of the world, it has begun to dawn even on public officials that walking is a highly efficient means of transit, as well as one of the great underrated pleasures in life. A few major cities have even tentatively begun to take back their streets for pedestrians.

Denver, for instance, is proposing a plan to invest $1.2 billion in sidewalks, and, at far greater cost, bring frequent public transit within a quarter-mile of most of its residents. In Europe, where clean, safe, punctual public transit is already widely available, Oslo plans to ban all cars from its city center beginning next year. Madrid is banning cars owned by nonresidents, and is also redesigning 24 major downtown avenues to take them back for pedestrians. Paris has banned vehicles from a road along the Seine, and plans to rebuild it for bicycle and pedestrian use.

Yes, car owners are furious. That’s because they have mistaken their century-long domination over pedestrians for a right rather than a privilege. The truth is that cities are not doing nearly enough to restore streets for pedestrian use, and it’s the pedestrians who should be furious.

Read about it: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/15/opinion/sunday/cars-pedestrians-cities.html