Over the most part of the 20th century, transport engineers believed that wider streets were safer streets. The usual wisdom was that larger roads provided greater visibility and more space for vehicles to avoid clashes. This principle of the design of the road quickly settled in transport departments throughout the country and in academic institutions that trained their employees. But this ordinary wisdom turned out to be a false assumption, which came with fatal consequences.
When wider streets were tested using solid data, it became clear that the opposite of what was assumed was actually true. Now we know that wider roads, as a rule, encourage faster and more careless driving, which increases the danger to everyone. Meanwhile, narrower streets make drivers slow down and be more attentive to their environment. If you once traveled along a narrow side street and an interstate highway, you know for sure what I mean.
The ideal width of the streets is one of many examples when the planners of the transport were mistaken when they were guided by assumptions instead of data. That's why I am seriously worried Introduction 1138Legislation is currently before the city council. The bill will dramatically change all 40,000 intersections throughout the city, setting universal “daylight”, which will prohibit the parking of a vehicle within 20 feet from a pedestrian crossing.
This is a well -intentioned bill, which is aimed at improving visibility, so that drivers and pedestrians can be easier to see each other. This is an idea that has a great sense on the surface, but a long -term one, the first study conducted by NYC DOT I found that this could lead to 15,000 additional injuries a yearField
How is it possible? Frankly, this is not the conclusion that we expected. We appreciated almost 8,000 intersections throughout the city and found that intersections with daylight required by this bill had more trauma of traffic than comparable crossroads without it.
Although these intersections received additional visibility, which was supposed to facilitate the drivers and pedestrians to see each other, the data indicate that they also changed the driver’s behavior in such a way as to reduce safety. Our study assumes that by eliminating the physical barrier caused by parked cars, the wider turning radius facilitated the drivers faster and swiftly rotate at the intersections.
Our results are very similar to assumptions about wider streets. In the same way as the transporters of transport later appeared to understand that narrower roads, as a rule, increase safety, and not wider ones, our study detects that a denser turning radius is preferable to wider. We even turned to the cities throughout the country to see if they conducted similar studies so that we could take into account these conclusions, but we did not find anything.
Like assumptions about the benefits of the safety of wider streets, assumptions were made about universal daylight, which are not supported by a thorough analysis.
Our study really discovered that the “hardened” daylight – Where you replace the parked car with a smaller physical object near the intersection, it may have advantages of safety. This is because you get benefits from improved visibility while maintaining a denser radius of rotation.
We have long used hardened daylight as one of many tools to make the streets safer. We use it in a situation by placing objects such as concrete blocks, bicycle racks or flower plantators near certain intersections. We will continue to use this treatment where it can be the most effective. And we will use other methods of streets design where they make sense. There is no single answer to the safety of the streets on the street, and we must do what works and do it in those places where it is most necessary.
I am proud that I am a supporter of the safety of the streets throughout my career. Be it Commissioner DOT Or, working in the city council, including as the chairman of the transport committee, I stubbornly fought for security – even when it was difficult.
During this time, it was an honor to stand on the shoulder to the shoulder with other transport security defenders and families who lost loved ones due to violence with the road traffic. I know that many of them care deeply about this bill, but devoted professionals in the field of career in New York Dot, who carefully and carefully studied this problem, found that universal daily lighting will make our streets less safe. That is why I resolutely opposed this bill and call my former colleagues in the city council to do the same.
Let's work together on Redyseign Bold Street projects, expanding hardened daily lighting, where it is appropriate and prioritize the most effective policy that makes our streets safer for everyone.
Rodriguez – Commissioner for New Yorka transport.
